property, no debt existed to be discharged unless that interest can somehow be avoided in the bankruptcy case.”). Many courts have considered the question of whether a former spouse’s entitlement to a portion of a military pension was to be viewed as a “debt”, and have concluded that “[disposable military retirement benefits are not debts as defined by 11 U.S.C. § 101(12) of the Bankruptcy Code, but rather, constitute the sole and separate property of a debtor’s former spouse where ' the spouse received an award of a portion of debtor’s military retirement benefits pursuant to a divorce decree or other order of the court.” Williams v. Califf (In re Califf), 195 B.R. 499, 501 (Bankr.N.D.Ala.1996); see also Lowenschuss v. Selnick (In re Lowenschuss), 170 F.3d 923, 930-31 (9th Cir. 1999) (<HOLDING>); Walston v. Walston, 190 B.R. 66, 69
holding that the defendant withheld pension benefits in breach of the plan holding that appropriate remedy was to compute service credit for veterans in accordance with vrra rather than pursuant to employers pension plan and requiring retroactive pension plan payments to be made holding that an employees protected interest in a pension vested before he or she became eligible to collect the pension holding that exwife had no interest in exhusbands erisa plan because each party clearly intended by the terms of a property settlement to relinquish all interests in the pension plans of the other holding that the family courts award to exwife of interest in 387 of debtors military pension payable directly from the plan was not subject to discharge because interest in pension plan was not a debt rather it was considered exwifes separate ownership interest