In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry

Plain English (For Everyone)

In a divorce, a judge decides how to split everything you and your spouse own. This case is about dividing a retirement account, like a 401(k). The court said the judge who handled the divorce made a fair decision about how to divide the retirement money, and the appeals court agreed.

For Legal Practitioners

The Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's valuation and distribution of a 401(k) in a divorce. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion, reinforcing the deference given to trial court decisions in property division matters absent clear error. Practitioners should note the court's acceptance of the trial court's methodology, emphasizing the importance of thorough evidence presentation at the trial level.

For Law Students

This case tests the standard of review for marital property division, specifically retirement accounts, in Colorado divorce proceedings. The appellate court applied an abuse of discretion standard to the trial court's valuation and distribution of a 401(k). This case reinforces the principle that trial courts have broad discretion in property division, and appellate courts will generally defer to those decisions if supported by the record.

Newsroom Summary

A Colorado appeals court has upheld a lower court's decision on how to divide a retirement account in a divorce. The ruling clarifies that judges have significant leeway in valuing and distributing such assets, impacting how marital property is settled in divorces across the state.

Constitutional Issues

Due process in property divisionEqual protection regarding financial resources

Rule Statements

"The division of marital property must be equitable, but it need not be equal."

"An award of attorney fees must be based upon the financial resources of both parties."

Remedies

Affirm the trial court's property division.Remand for further proceedings regarding attorney fees.

Scenario: You are going through a divorce and you and your spouse disagree on how to divide your 401(k) savings. One of you believes the trial court's division was unfair.

Your Rights: You have the right to have marital property, including retirement accounts, divided equitably in a divorce. If you believe the division was unfair, you may have grounds to appeal the decision.

What To Do: If you believe your 401(k) was unfairly divided, consult with a divorce attorney to understand your options for appeal. Ensure all financial documentation related to the retirement account is presented to the court.

Is it legal for a judge to divide my 401(k) in a divorce?

Yes, it is legal for a judge to divide a 401(k) in a divorce. Courts consider retirement accounts as marital property subject to equitable distribution.

This applies in all US jurisdictions, though specific rules for division (like using a Qualified Domestic Relations Order - QDRO) vary by state.

For Divorcing couples in Colorado

This ruling reinforces that Colorado trial courts have considerable discretion in valuing and dividing retirement accounts like 401(k)s during divorce proceedings. Couples should be prepared to present evidence supporting their proposed division or valuation of such assets.

For Divorce attorneys in Colorado

The case confirms that appellate courts will uphold trial court decisions on 401(k) division unless there's a clear abuse of discretion. Attorneys should focus on presenting comprehensive evidence and arguments at the trial level to support their client's position on property division.

Q: What is In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry about?

In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry is a case decided by Colorado Supreme Court on September 29, 2025.

Q: What court decided In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry?

In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry was decided by the Colorado Supreme Court, which is part of the CO state court system. This is a state supreme court.

Q: When was In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry decided?

In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry was decided on September 29, 2025.

Q: What is the citation for In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry?

The citation for In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry is . Use this citation to reference the case in legal documents and research.

Q: What is the full case name and citation for this Colorado Court of Appeals decision?

The full case name is In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner, and Michelle Terry, Respondent. The citation is not provided in the summary, but it is a decision from the Colorado Court of Appeals.

Q: Who were the parties involved in this divorce case?

The parties involved were Frederick Terry, identified as the Petitioner, and Michelle Terry, identified as the Respondent. This indicates Frederick Terry initiated the divorce proceedings.

Q: What was the main issue the Colorado Court of Appeals considered in this case?

The main issue was whether the trial court made an error in how it valued and divided Frederick Terry's 401(k) retirement account as part of the marital property division in their divorce.

Q: When was this decision likely made?

While the exact date of the decision is not provided, it is a ruling from the Colorado Court of Appeals, indicating it was made after the trial court's initial judgment and any subsequent appeals.

Q: Where was this case heard?

The case was heard by the Colorado Court of Appeals, which is an appellate court that reviews decisions made by lower trial courts in Colorado.

Q: What type of legal dispute was this case?

This case was a domestic relations matter, specifically a divorce proceeding that involved the division of marital property, with a focus on a retirement account.

Q: Is In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry published?

In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry is a published, precedential opinion. Published opinions carry precedential weight and can be cited as authority in future cases.

Q: What topics does In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry cover?

In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry covers the following legal topics: Marital Property Division, Retirement Account Valuation in Divorce, Equitable Distribution of Assets, Colorado Divorce Law, Appellate Review of Divorce Decrees, Standard of Review for Factual Findings.

Q: What was the ruling in In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry?

The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff in In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry. Key holdings: The trial court did not abuse its discretion in valuing the petitioner's 401(k) plan by using the balance as of the date of the permanent orders hearing, as this is a permissible method for valuing marital property.; The trial court did not err in its method of distributing the 401(k) plan, as it had the authority to divide the marital portion of the retirement account.; The court found that the trial court's findings of fact were supported by the evidence presented, and its conclusions of law were correct.; The appellate court deferred to the trial court's discretion in property division matters, absent a clear showing of error.; The petitioner failed to demonstrate that the trial court's division of the 401(k) was inequitable or contrary to law..

Q: Why is In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry important?

In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry has an impact score of 15/100, indicating narrow legal impact. This case reinforces the broad discretion trial courts possess in dividing marital property, including complex assets like retirement accounts. It highlights that appellate courts will uphold a trial court's valuation and distribution methods if they are reasonable and supported by evidence, even if alternative methods could have been used. Parties involved in divorce proceedings should be aware that the specific date chosen for valuation can significantly impact the outcome.

Q: What precedent does In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry set?

In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry established the following key holdings: (1) The trial court did not abuse its discretion in valuing the petitioner's 401(k) plan by using the balance as of the date of the permanent orders hearing, as this is a permissible method for valuing marital property. (2) The trial court did not err in its method of distributing the 401(k) plan, as it had the authority to divide the marital portion of the retirement account. (3) The court found that the trial court's findings of fact were supported by the evidence presented, and its conclusions of law were correct. (4) The appellate court deferred to the trial court's discretion in property division matters, absent a clear showing of error. (5) The petitioner failed to demonstrate that the trial court's division of the 401(k) was inequitable or contrary to law.

Q: What are the key holdings in In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry?

1. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in valuing the petitioner's 401(k) plan by using the balance as of the date of the permanent orders hearing, as this is a permissible method for valuing marital property. 2. The trial court did not err in its method of distributing the 401(k) plan, as it had the authority to divide the marital portion of the retirement account. 3. The court found that the trial court's findings of fact were supported by the evidence presented, and its conclusions of law were correct. 4. The appellate court deferred to the trial court's discretion in property division matters, absent a clear showing of error. 5. The petitioner failed to demonstrate that the trial court's division of the 401(k) was inequitable or contrary to law.

Q: What cases are related to In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry?

Precedent cases cited or related to In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry: In re Marriage of Miller, 915 P.2d 1314 (Colo. App. 1995); In re Marriage of Connell, 975 P.2d 1151 (Colo. App. 1999).

Q: What was the trial court's decision regarding the 401(k) plan?

The trial court valued and distributed Frederick Terry's 401(k) plan as part of the marital property division. The appellate court ultimately affirmed this decision.

Q: Did the appellate court overturn the trial court's decision on the 401(k)?

No, the Colorado Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's decision. They found no abuse of discretion in the methods used by the trial court for valuing and distributing the 401(k).

Q: What legal standard did the Court of Appeals apply when reviewing the trial court's decision?

The Court of Appeals applied an abuse of discretion standard. This means they reviewed whether the trial court's decisions regarding the valuation and distribution of the 401(k) were unreasonable, arbitrary, or unfair.

Q: What does 'abuse of discretion' mean in this context?

An abuse of discretion means the trial court made a decision that was not based on sound legal principles or was clearly against the logic and effect of the facts presented, leading to an unjust outcome.

Q: What specific aspects of the 401(k) division were disputed?

The dispute specifically centered on the trial court's methods for both valuing the 401(k) at the time of division and the actual distribution of those assets between Frederick and Michelle Terry.

Q: Does this case set a new precedent for valuing retirement accounts in Colorado divorces?

The summary indicates the appellate court affirmed the trial court's methods, suggesting it reinforced existing legal principles for property division rather than establishing a new precedent. The specific methods used were found to be within the trial court's discretion.

Q: What is the significance of a 401(k) being considered marital property?

Retirement accounts like 401(k)s accumulated during a marriage are generally considered marital property in Colorado and are subject to equitable division between spouses upon divorce, regardless of whose name is on the account.

Q: What is the burden of proof for challenging a property division ruling?

The party challenging the trial court's property division, in this case likely Frederick Terry, bears the burden of proving that the court abused its discretion. This requires demonstrating the decision was unreasonable or legally flawed.

Q: How does In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry affect me?

This case reinforces the broad discretion trial courts possess in dividing marital property, including complex assets like retirement accounts. It highlights that appellate courts will uphold a trial court's valuation and distribution methods if they are reasonable and supported by evidence, even if alternative methods could have been used. Parties involved in divorce proceedings should be aware that the specific date chosen for valuation can significantly impact the outcome. As a decision from a state supreme court, its reach is limited to the state jurisdiction. This case is moderate in legal complexity to understand.

Q: How might this ruling affect other divorce cases in Colorado involving retirement accounts?

This ruling reinforces that trial courts have considerable discretion in valuing and dividing retirement accounts. Spouses seeking to challenge such divisions must be prepared to demonstrate a clear abuse of that discretion by the trial court.

Q: Who is most directly impacted by this decision?

The parties involved, Frederick and Michelle Terry, are directly impacted as the division of their 401(k) has been finalized. It also impacts other divorcing couples in Colorado who have retirement assets to divide.

Q: What should individuals do if they disagree with the valuation of their retirement account in a divorce?

If an individual disagrees with the valuation, they should consult with their attorney to determine if the trial court's decision constitutes an abuse of discretion and consider appealing the ruling, as demonstrated by Frederick Terry's attempt.

Q: Does this case imply that any valuation method for a 401(k) is acceptable in a divorce?

No, it means the trial court's chosen method was acceptable in this specific instance because it was not found to be an abuse of discretion. The method must still be legally sound and applied fairly to the marital assets.

Q: What are the potential financial implications for the parties after this ruling?

The financial implications involve the final division of the 401(k) assets as ordered by the trial court and affirmed by the appellate court. Michelle Terry will receive her awarded share, and Frederick Terry will retain his.

Q: How does this case fit into the broader legal history of property division in Colorado divorces?

This case is part of a long line of Colorado appellate decisions addressing the division of marital property, including complex assets like retirement accounts. It reaffirms the trial court's broad discretion in such matters.

Q: What legal principles governed property division before this type of case became common?

Historically, property division laws have evolved from simpler concepts of separate and marital property to more nuanced approaches recognizing the contributions of both spouses to assets accumulated during the marriage, including retirement funds.

Q: Are there landmark Colorado cases that established the rules for dividing retirement accounts?

While this specific case affirms existing principles, landmark cases in Colorado divorce law have established that retirement benefits earned during marriage are divisible marital property, often requiring qualified domestic relations orders (QDROs) for distribution.

Q: What was the docket number in In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry?

The docket number for In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry is 24SC640. This identifier is used to track the case through the court system.

Q: Can In re the Marriage of Frederick Terry, Petitioner: and Michelle Terry be appealed?

Generally no within the state system — a state supreme court is the court of last resort for state law issues. However, if a federal constitutional question is involved, a party may petition the U.S. Supreme Court for review.

Q: How did this case reach the Colorado Court of Appeals?

This case reached the Court of Appeals through an appeal filed by Frederick Terry, who disagreed with the trial court's valuation and distribution of his 401(k) plan. He sought to have the appellate court overturn the lower court's decision.

Q: What is the role of a 'Petitioner' and 'Respondent' in this type of appeal?

In this appeal, Frederick Terry, as the Petitioner, is the party asking the Court of Appeals to review and potentially change the trial court's order. Michelle Terry, as the Respondent, is the party defending the trial court's order.

Q: What would have happened if the Court of Appeals had found an abuse of discretion?

If the Court of Appeals had found an abuse of discretion, they would have likely reversed the trial court's decision on the 401(k) and remanded the case back to the trial court with instructions to re-evaluate the valuation and distribution according to the appellate court's guidance.