Gill v. Gill should have been a standard case about classifying, valuing, and distributing marital property during a marriage dissolution. Instead, Gill developed into an authoritative case that usurped legislative authority and created new precedent. Creating new precedent was unnecessary because there was ample discretion provided in the governing statutes to obtain a just and equitable distribution. Further, the new precedent is undesirable because it takes away the flexibility and certainty of the governing statutes, while proliferating gender and role-based disparities that the legislature has purposefully tried to eliminate.
