In the Pursuit of Domestic Tranquility - Matrimonial Attorneys Should Follow the Bouncing Beneficiary Designations

Andrew L. Oringer and Albert Feuer, In the Pursuit of Domestic Tranquility - Matrimonial Attorneys Should Follow the Bouncing Beneficiary Designations, 43 Comp. Plan. J. 43 (March 6, 2015)

10 Pages Posted: 18 Mar 2015 Last revised: 23 Mar 2016

See all articles by Andrew L. Oringer

Andrew L. Oringer

Dechert LLP; Hofstra University - Maurice A. Deane School of Law

Albert Feuer

Law Offices of Albert Feuer

Date Written: March 6, 2015

Abstract

The Supreme Court, in Kennedy v. Plan Administrator for DuPont Savings and Investment Plan, 555 U.S. 285 (2009) identified the “plan documents” rule (the “Plan Documents Rule”) as the legal doctrine that controls the inquiry regarding beneficiary identification for ERISA plans. The Plan Documents Rule presents an extremely bright-line standard. Generally, the inquiry starts and stops with determining who is designated as the applicable beneficiary under and in accordance with the governing plan. However, Kennedy, in a footnote, raised a question as to whether a claimant may have a cause of action against a person to whom the plan paid benefits in accordance with the governing plan documents.

This article reviews the Court's Kennedy approach, discusses the approach taken in various post-Kennedy cases, and show how the Plan Document Rule may pose a trap for the unwary. If the beneficiary designation under an ERISA-governed plan is inconsistent with other domestic-relations documents, or otherwise inconsistent with the parties’ apparent intent, the beneficiary designation will nevertheless govern the plan’s benefit payment obligation. However, there may be litigation and disputes about whether the plan’s designated beneficiary is entitled to retain the benefit amounts received from the ERISA plan. Further, such disputes may arise for an ERISA plan that is a pension plan, a life-insurance plan, or some other type of plan, or whether the plan terms include a revocation upon divorce provision.

Fortunately, the Plan Documents Rule also provides a clear path to accuracy and certainty for a plan participant and all parties affected by the participant’s marital dissolution. Domestic-relations attorneys can do so by (i) consulting with their clients, (ii) ascertaining the intent of the clients and drafting the applicable dissolution documentation reflecting that intent, and (iii) critically, consulting with their clients so that the plan participant ultimately submits post-dissolution beneficiary designations consistent with the intended terms of the dissolution.

Keywords: beneficiary, dispute, ERISA, survivor benefits, estates, domestic relations, employee benefit, preemption, waiver, community property, elective share

JEL Classification: G22, G23, J12, J26, J32, K12, K19

Suggested Citation

Oringer, Andrew L. and Feuer, Albert, In the Pursuit of Domestic Tranquility - Matrimonial Attorneys Should Follow the Bouncing Beneficiary Designations (March 6, 2015). Andrew L. Oringer and Albert Feuer, In the Pursuit of Domestic Tranquility - Matrimonial Attorneys Should Follow the Bouncing Beneficiary Designations, 43 Comp. Plan. J. 43 (March 6, 2015), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2579403

Andrew L. Oringer

Dechert LLP ( email )

1095 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036-6797
United States
212-698-3571 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://www.dechert.com

Hofstra University - Maurice A. Deane School of Law ( email )

121 Hofstra University
Hempstead, NY 11549
United States

Albert Feuer (Contact Author)

Law Offices of Albert Feuer ( email )

New York, NY
United States
718-263-9874 (Phone)

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
80
Abstract Views
857
rank
342,814
PlumX Metrics