A Pennsylvania woman cannot retroactively specify which benefits option is attached to her ex-husband’s pension, a Northumberland County judge has ruled, because the couple’s separation agreement was silent on the issue and because such relief is now barred by the doctrine of laches.
Common Pleas Court Judge Charles H. Saylor said the 2008 separation agreement (MSA) between plaintiff Ann L. Swank and her ex-husband, defendant Mark D. Swank, did not address which benefits option would apply to Mark Swank’s State Employees Retirement System (SERS) pension — which the couple agreed to split 50-50.
