Charlie, I would be happy to respond and certainly understand. When dividing the martial assets, the Judge will refer to and use the following Indiana codes, which I have listed below. One of the more interesting things and an argument to present is the fact that you were only married three years, so the amount which she may be able to obtain in regard to the pension may not be as much. As far as the home and the Honda CRV, both would be considered marital assets if obtained during the court of the marriage. As such, you both would have an equal right to them and it would need to be decided with the home if it will be awarded to one party or sold, with the profits shared equally, or if one party will be able to live there and need to pay the mortgage on their own. In an ideal situation, you and her would be able to decide that issue, along with who gets the Honda and assumes the payments. Both debts either need to be shared or assumed by one party or action needs to be taken to sell one or both and take any profits or share any loses, in the event of the car being sold, unless there is equity in it.
Division of property
Sec. 4. (a) In an action for dissolution of marriage
under IC 31-15-2-2, the court shall divide the property of the parties, whether:
(1) owned by either spouse before the marriage;
(2) acquired by either spouse in his or her own right:
(A) after the marriage; and
(B) before final separation
of the parties; or
(3) acquired by their joint efforts.
(b) The court shall divide the property in a just and reasonable manner by:
(1) division of the property in kind;
(2) setting the property or parts of the property over to one (1) of the spouses and requiring either spouse to pay an amount, either in gross or in installments, that is just and proper;
(3) ordering the sale of the property under such conditions as the court prescribes and dividing the proceeds of the sale; or
(4) ordering the distribution of benefits described in IC 31-9-2-98(b)(2) or IC 31-9-2-98(b)(3) that are payable after the dissolution of marriage, by setting aside to either of the parties a percentage of those payments either by assignment or in kind at the time of receipt.
As added by P.L.1-1997, SEC.7.
Presumption for equal division of marital property; rebuttal
Sec. 5. The court shall presume that an equal division of the marital property between the parties is just and reasonable. However, this presumption may be rebutted by a party who presents relevant evidence, including evidence concerning the following factors, that an equal division would not be just and reasonable:
(1) The contribution of each spouse to the acquisition of the property, regardless of whether the contribution was income producing.
(2) The extent to which the property was acquired by each spouse:
(A) before the marriage; or
(B) through inheritance or gift.
(3) The economic circumstances of each spouse at the time the disposition of the property is to become effective, including the desirability of awarding the family residence or the right to dwell in the family residence for such periods as the court considers just to the spouse having custody of any children.
(4) The conduct of the parties during the marriage as related to the disposition or dissipation of their property.
(5) The earnings or earning ability of the parties as related to:
(A) a final division of property; and
(B) a final determination of the property rights of the parties.
In regard to the award of maintenance, here is what the Judge will look at as well.
Findings concerning maintenance
Sec. 2. A court may make the following findings concerning maintenance:
(1) If the court finds a spouse to be physically or mentally incapacitated to the extent that the ability of the incapacitated spouse to support himself or herself is materially affected, the court may find that maintenance for the spouse is necessary during the period of incapacity, subject to further order of the court.
(2) If the court finds that:
(A) a spouse lacks sufficient property, including marital property apportioned to the spouse, to provide for the spouse's needs; and
(B) the spouse is the custodian of a child whose physical or mental incapacity requires the custodian to forgo employment;
the court may find that maintenance is necessary for the spouse in an amount and for a period of time that the court considers appropriate.
(3) After considering:
(A) the educational level of each spouse at the time of marriage and at the time the action is commenced;
(B) whether an interruption in the education, training, or employment of a spouse who is seeking maintenance occurred during the marriage as a result of homemaking or child care responsibilities, or both;
(C) the earning capacity of each spouse, including educational background, training, employment skills, work experience, and length of presence in or absence from the job market; and
(D) the time and expense necessary to acquire sufficient education or training to enable the spouse who is seeking maintenance to find appropriate employment;
a court may find that rehabilitative maintenance for the spouse seeking maintenance is necessary in an amount and for a period of time that the court considers appropriate, but not to exceed three (3) years from the date of the final decree.
Her IRA has the same effect as the pensions that she is going after since it all was not acquired during the course of the 3 year marriage. These are issues in which a claim could be made for a portion thereof and something which you can use to your advantage to make a claim against her IRA like she is doing with you.