15 Vt. Stat. Ann. § 751

Section 751 lets a party request equitable property division; without such a motion, the family court need not review a settlement agreement unless the parties submit it for incorporation in the divorce order.

Manosh v. Manosh · filed 1993-07-09

Under § 751, a party to a divorce may move the court to equitably divide the parties’ property. Where there is no § 751 motion, however, the family court has no independent obligation to review an agreement unless it is submitted by the parties to be incorporated in the divorce order.

Section 751 permits a court to consider liabilities when dividing property, but does not require it to allocate marital debt unless a party asks it to do so.

Demgard v. Demgard · filed 2001-12-19

First, Vermont statutes governing divorce proceedings do not obligate the family court to allocate responsibility for marital debt absent the parties’ invocation of the court’s equitable jurisdiction to do so. See 4 V.S.A. § 453(a) (family court has all equitable powers of superior court as to civil matters within its jurisdiction); 15 V.S.A. § 751(a) (upon motion of either party, court shall settle rights of parties to their property). The court may consider the parties’ liabilities when deciding how to allocate property, 15 V.S.A § 751(b)(6), but nothing in the statutes mandates that the court determine the parties’ rights with respect to their debts absent some request to do so.

Section 751’s property division factors do not justify rejecting a voluntary property agreement because it does not account for a spouse’s homemaker contributions.

Boisclair v. Boisclair · filed 2004-05-12

The fact that wife would have been entitled to have her contributions as homemaker factored in under § 751 if the court had conducted the property distribution cannot be grounds to reject a private agreement.

Section 751(a) allows a Vermont family court to divide spouses’ property in a divorce decree, fixing their respective interests when the decree is entered.

Devenger v. Forant (In Re Forant) · filed 2004-08-27(a)

Thus, pursuant to 15 V.S.A. § 751(a), the Caledonia County family court determined the parties’ interests in the subject account properties: Plaintiff has a 100% interest in the 401k retirement account and a 75% interest in the marital portion of the VMERA. Therefore, as of the date of the family court order — and hence, on the date of his bankruptcy filing — the Defendant had no interest in the 401k account and had only a remainder balance interest in the VMERA.

Section 751(b)’s property division factors guide whether a divorce settlement is equitable, including the length of the marriage and each spouse’s ability to earn income and acquire assets.

Camara v. Camara · filed 2010-06-02(b)

The court similarly did not err in finding the agreement equitable. ... In reaching its decision, the court considered all of the factors set forth in 15 V.S.A. § 751(b), including the fact that the parties had a lengthy marriage, and that husband had a much greater ability than wife to generate income and acquire assets.

Section 751 authorizes the family division to divide marital property in a divorce action; that authority ends when a party’s death abates the action.

Maier v. Maier · filed 2021-10-29(a)

Because the family division’s jurisdiction to divide marital property in a divorce is incident to its jurisdiction to enter a divorce judgment, abatement of the divorce terminates the family division’s authority to divide marital property, whether pursuant to a stipulation or a ... contested hearing. See 15 V.S.A. § 751 (describing family division’s authority to divide parties’ property in “a proceeding under [the] chapter” that applies to annulment and divorce proceedings). The family division’s authority to divide marital property in the context of divorce depends on the continuing existence of a divorce action. When the divorce action abates, the family division’s authority to divide marital property abates.

Section 751(b)(8)(C) bars a subpoena for a nonparty’s testimony about a revocable trust unless a spouse’s interest has vested under the trust’s terms and cannot be modified or divested.

Collins v. Collins · filed 2017-08-04(b)(8)(C)

The statutory exception allowing a subpoena for testimony about a party’s vested interest in a trust is concerned with the terms of the trust and not with the capacity of the grantor to amend the trust.

Section 751(b)(8)(C)(i) bars a subpoena for a nonparty trustee’s financial information unless a divorcing party’s interest in the trust is vested and cannot be modified or divested.

Gennifer Noble v. Noble · filed 2020-12-04(b)(8)(C)(i)

Pursuant to the plain language of § 751(b)(8)(C)(i), the nonparty trustee cannot be subjected to subpoena to provide documents or testify about the value of the trust unless wife has an interest in the trust “that is vested and not capable of modification or divestment.”