The Trial Court found that ex-husband had to reimburse ex-wife for her marital share of funds used to purchase the enhancement. Ex-wife appealed.  She argued that the permissive military service credit was marital property since the enhancement had been purchased with marital funds.

The Appellate Court reversed the Trial Court. It found that the permissive service credit was marital property.   A portion of the credit accrued during ex-husband’s marriage If was, therefore, subject to equitable division.

Ex-husband’s entitlement to an enhanced annuity accrued while he participated in the pension plan.   A  portion of that credit accrued during his marriage to his now ex-wife.

The fact that the enhancement was calculated based on a number equal to the number of months he had served in the armed forces did not mean that he acquired the asset at the time of his military service.

His military service had no relationship to his pension benefit until he exercised the option of purchasing the 48-months of additional credits.  This which was done during the marriage and with the use of marital funds.

Zamudia v. Ochoa, Jr., No. 124676, 3rd Dist.