Opinion · Alabama Court Opinions

FRIZZELL v. FRIZZELL, 628 So.2d 871 (Ala.Civ.App. 1993)

628 So.2d 871

Type: Opinion
Court: Alabama Court Opinions
Jurisdiction: Alabama
Date: 1993-09-24
Topic: general

FRIZZELL v. FRIZZELL, 628 So.2d 871 (Ala.Civ.App. 1993) 628 So.2d 871 Ralph E. FRIZZELL v. Marion T. FRIZZELL.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed FRIZZELL v. FRIZZELL, 628 So.2d 871 (Ala.Civ.App. 1993). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

FRIZZELL v. FRIZZELL,628 So.2d 871(Ala.Civ.App. 1993)

628 So.2d 871

Ralph E. FRIZZELL v. Marion T. FRIZZELL.

AV92000517.

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

September 24, 1993.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Baldwin County, James H. Reid, J.

Benjamin C. Maumenee of Benjamin C. Maumenee, P.C., Fairhope, for appellant.

Bayless E. Biles of Wilkins, Bankester, Biles Wynne, Bay Minette, for appellee.

L. CHARLES WRIGHT, Retired Appellate Judge.

Following oral proceedings, the trial court divorced the parties, divided their property, and awarded the wife periodic alimony and alimony in gross. The husband appeals.

The husband asserts that the trial court erred in awarding to the wife, as alimony in gross, a portion of his individual retirement accounts (IRAs). The husband insists that pursuant toKabaci v. Kabaci,373 So.2d 1144(Ala.Civ.App. 1979), and its progeny, his IRAs are considered retirement benefits and, therefore, are not subject to division as alimony in gross or as a property settlement.Page 872

This court has previously determined thatKabaciis not pertinent to the divisibility of IRAs in a divorce action. We have determined that IRAs may be awarded as alimony in gross or as a property settlement incident to divorce.Walters v.Walters,628 So.2d 720(Ala.Civ.App. 1993);DeLaurentis v.DeLaurentis,628 So.2d 650(Ala.Civ.App. 1993);Poole v.Poole,522 So.2d 288(Ala.Civ.App. 1988). We further note that our supreme court has recently overruledKabaci"and the cases relying on the rule ofKabaci."Ex parte Vaughn, [Ms. 1911634, August 27, 1993], 1993 WL 325208 (Ala. 1993).

The husband raises no further issues for our review. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

The foregoing opinion was prepared by Retired Appellate Judge L. CHARLES WRIGHT while serving on active duty status as a judge of this court under the provisions of §12-18-10(e), Code 1975, and this opinion is hereby adopted as that of the court.

AFFIRMED.

All the Judges concur.