Heger v. Heger (2009) & Understanding the Bangs Formula

Although most states in the U.S. have nearly identical definitions of marital and nonmarital property, different states use different strategies when it comes to dividing marital property. In Maryland, courts use the so-called Bangs formula when they divide a pension or retirement account which is not wholly marital property. In other words, when a pension or retirement account is partly marital and partly nonmarital, courts use the Bangs formula to properly distribute the marital portion of the asset. The Bangs formula came into play in the well-known case of Heger v. Heger (2009). Let’s take a closer look at this case so we can see the formula in action.

Overview of Heger v. Heger (2009)

The couple in this case were married in 1990 and then formally divorced in 2007; the couple separated in 2003 when the wife moved to Indiana. During the marriage, the couple had two children. The husband had served as a police officer both before and during the marriage, and so not all of his police department pension account was considered “marital property.” When the couple ultimately went to court to finalize their divorce, a question remained as to the exact portion of the account which was classifiable as marital property. The court applied the Bangs formula in order to precisely determine the marital portion of the account.

The Bangs formula can be described as when a person’s pension or retirement account originates prior to the beginning of a marriage, only the benefits accrued during the marriage count as marital property; any benefits accrued prior to or after the marriage are classified as separate property. The marital portion of a pension or retirement account will be divided equally between the parties, unless there is a compelling reason to divide the account unequally (consistent with equitable distribution).

In this case, the trial court initially determined that the wife was entitled to 32% of the total pension account; this was based on a determination that 64% of the pension account was marital property (hence 64% divided by 2 = 32%). The husband appealed this determination by arguing that the trial court made a mathematical error which resulted in the marital portion being too large.

Outcome & Discussion

On appeal, the appellate division found that the husband’s argument with respect to the Bangs formula was correct. In the original opinion issued by the trial court, an error was made, and the 32% of the pension granted to the wife was a result of this error. In the recalculation, the wife was awarded 25% of the pension. The correct calculation went as follows: the husband’s total pension account was accrued over a period of 312 months; the couple was married for a total of 155 months, and those 155 months all took place while the pension account was in place; hence, 312 divided by155 = 49.7, and this was rounded to 50%. The wife was entitled to half of the 50% of the pension account, which was 25%. The husband was then ordered to grant that portion of 25% to the wife.

Contact the Murphy Law Firm for More Information

If you would like to learn more about the Bangs formula, or if you need professional assistance on a new legal matter, we encourage you to reach out to one of the leading attorneys at the Murphy Law Firm today by calling 240-219-9311.