Mickey v. Mickey: The Long-Awaited Clarification in the Landscape of Equitable Distribution of Marital Assets Comment

Although the equitable distribution of assets during a marital dissolution proceeding is governed by Connecticut General Statutes section 46b-81, the interpretation of this statutory language has resulted in somewhat inconsistent case law, culminating in the Supreme Court of Connecticut’s recent decision in Mickey v. Mickey. This Comment traces the judicial history of equitable distribution in Connecticut by reviewing several cases preceding the Mickey decision. These cases have constructed a two-part test to determine whether property is equitably distributable. The asset must be either (1) a presently existing and enforceable right or (2) a contingent interest that is not too speculative. Next, this Comment discusses the manners in which other jurisdictions have equitably distributed marital assets. This Comment then analyzes the Mickey majority and dissenting opinions. While the dissenting opinion characterizes the party’s interest as presently existing, the majority opinion describes it as an inchoate property interest that is too speculative to be equitably distributed. The Mickey decision is somewhat controversial because it is factually analogous to a preceding case, yet asserts a contradictory holding to it. Finally, this Comment concludes by considering where Connecticut jurisprudence stands today in regard to the equitable distribution of marital assets in light of the Court’s holding in Mickey