AVIS BROWN
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES, DIVISION OF RETIREMENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Avis Brown appealed a decision by Florida's Department of Management Services denying her claim for additional retirement benefits from her former husband's FRS account. The court affirmed the denial because the ten-year survivor benefit window under the pension plan option her former husband selected had expired before his death, and the Qualified Domestic Relations Order could not extend benefits beyond those contractually accrued.
Appellant is not entitled to additional retirement benefits because the ten-year survivor benefit period provided under the selected retirement option 2 had expired as of June 2008, ten years after the former husband's retirement in 1998. The QDRO could not change or extend benefits accrued under the retirement plan option, which are of a contractual nature.
[1] A QDRO cannot extend or modify the specific terms of a survivor benefit election under an FRS pension plan beyond the statutory period specified by the retiree's benefit…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the rights of members of the retirement system established by this chapter are declared to be of a contractual nature”
Establishes that FRS retirement benefits are contractual rights that cannot be modified by a QDRO beyond the original terms selected.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant's former husband retired on July 1, 1998, and selected retirement option 2 under FRS, naming Appellant as beneficiary. Option 2 provided mon…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________
No. 1D2023-0708 _____________________________
AVIS BROWN,
Appellant,
v. STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES, DIVISION OF RETIREMENT,
Appellee.
_____________________________
On appeal from the Department of Management Services. Pedro Allende, Secretary.
May 29, 2024 PER CURIAM.
Appellant challenges the final order of the Florida Department of Management Services, Division of Retirement, finding that Appellant is not entitled to additional retirement benefit payments from her late former husband’s Florida Retirement System (FRS) account. Because Appellant fails to establish a statutory ground to set aside the final order, we must affirm. See § 120.68(8), Fla. Stat. (2023).
The facts were undisputed. Appellant’s former husband retired on July 1, 1998. Under section 121.091(6)(a), Florida Statutes (1998), governing payout options for FRS pension plan
retirees, the former husband chose option 2 and named Appellant as his beneficiary. Option 2 provides that a monthly retirement benefit will be paid to the retiree for life, but if the retiree dies during the first ten years after retirement, then the beneficiary receives “the same monthly amount payable for the balance of such 10-year period.” § 121.091(6)(a)2., Fla. Stat.
As required by section 121.091(6)(a), Appellant was “notified of” and “acknowledge[d] such election” made by the former husband by signing at the appropriate line on her former husband’s FRS application for retirement. That application listed all four retirement options available to the former husband and the benefits, if any, Appellant would receive upon his death. See § 121.091(6)(a)1.–4., Fla. Stat.
Appellant’s marriage to the former husband was dissolved in 2003 and the Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) entered by the court required that Appellant remain the designated beneficiary for purposes of the former husband’s FRS retirement benefit. Under the QDRO, the former husband was prohibited from removing Appellant as the beneficiary of his retirement account during Appellant’s lifetime. However, the QDRO did not and could not change benefits accrued under section 121.091(6)(a)2., including the ten-year window for a survivor benefit elected by the former husband. See § 121.011(3)(d), Fla. Stat. (stating that “the rights of members of the retirement system established by this chapter are declared to be of a contractual nature”).
June 2008 was ten years from the former husband’s retirement date. At this point, section 121.091(6)(a)2. no longer provided for any survivor benefits upon the death of the former husband. The former husband died in 2017, more than nineteen years after his retirement date, and the retirement benefits payable to him expired upon his death. Thus, no retirement benefits were payable to Appellant under section 121.091(6)(a)2.
The Department did not misinterpret section 121.091 or any administrative rule promulgated to carry out the statute. See § 120.68(7)(d)–(e), Fla. Stat. The agency final action is therefore
AFFIRMED.
B.L. THOMAS, BILBREY, and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur.
_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________
Antonio G. Hernández of Antonio G Hernández PA, Coral Gables, for Appellant. Kristen Larson, General Counsel, James Burkhart, Assistant General Counsel, and Lee Damessous, Managing Attorney, Department of Management Services, Tallahassee, for Appellee.