C.F.R. » Title 5 » CHAPTER I—OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT › SUBCHAPTER B—CIVIL SERVICE REGULATIONS › PART 838—COURT ORDERS AFFECTING RETIREMENT BENEFITS › Subpart C—Requirements for Court Orders Affecting Employee Annuities

5 C.F.R. § 838.301

Purpose and scope

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

This subpart regulates the requirements that a court order directed at employee annuity must meet to be a court order acceptable for processing.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2004–2022 · leading case: Wallop v. Wallop, 2004 WY 46 (Wyo. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Wallop v. Wallop, 2004 WY 46 (Wyo. 2004). “” [¶ 56] 5 C.F.R. § 838.301 et seq., as well as the Handbook, at pp.”
Pamela A. Dobbins v. Mark J. Dobbins, 2020 ME 73 (Me. 2020). · cites it 2× “[¶15] Because we conclude that the court could not order Mark to retire, we do not reach the constitutional and due process arguments raised by Mark.”
Murray Johnson v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 2022 MSPB 19 (MSPB 2022). “302 (a)(2)); see 5 C.F.R. § 838.301 ; 5 C.F.R. §§ 838.304 -.”
Atwood v. Atwood, 511 P.3d 823 (Haw. App. 2022). “" 5 C.F.R. § 838.301 . A "court order directed at employee annuity is not a court order acceptable for processing unless it expressly divides the employee annuity" and directs "[the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)] to pay the former spouse directly.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.