A 2013 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court
illustrates the importance of updating beneficiary forms regularly. If you
don’t, your desired heirs can lose a valuable asset.
This
case, Hillman vs. Maretta, had its
genesis in 1996, when Warren Hillman married Judy Maretta. Warren was a federal
employee, so he named Judy as the beneficiary of his group term life insurance
policy. The couple was divorced after two years, and Warren subsequently married
Jacqueline. Warren and Jacqueline were still married in 2008 when Warren died;
that life insurance policy’s death benefit was nearly $125,000.
As
it turned out, Warren had never changed the beneficiary designation on the
policy. Thus, Judy received the death benefit, and Jacqueline went to court to
get the money from Judy.
State versus
federal
The case took place in the state of Virginia, which
has passed a state law saying that a divorce or annulment revokes a beneficiary
designation relating to death benefits. That sounds like it should have settled
the matter, but Warren’s life insurance policy was created under the Federal Employees’
Government Life Insurance Act (FEGLIA), a federal law, and the U.S. Constitution
states that federal law will trump state law when there’s a conflict.
Nevertheless,
Jacqueline still had a card to play. Virginia has another law saying, in
essence, that if death benefits are turned over to a former spouse because of
such a conflict, that former spouse is liable for the amount in question,
payable to the person who otherwise would have collected. Thus, Jacqueline
(Warren’s widow) sued Judy for the amount of the insurance proceeds.
Court conflicts
Did federal law override state law, giving the life
insurance benefits to Judy? All parties agreed that was the case. But did the
second Virginia law prevail, allowing Jacqueline to ultimately collect the death
benefits from Judy? That was the question dividing the Virginia courts and bringing
the matter to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In
2013, the Supreme Court decided Hillman
vs. Maretta in favor of Judy, the former spouse and the designated
beneficiary. “FEGLIA establishes a clear and
predictable procedure for an employee to indicate who the intended beneficiary
shall be,” the Supreme Court noted, so federal employees have an “unfettered
freedom of choice in selecting a beneficiary and to ensure the proceeds
actually belong to that beneficiary.” State law can’t overturn that federal
law’s intent, the Court ruled.
Not every case will come down in
favor of a former spouse. ERISA, a federal law covering retirement plans, gives
a current spouse certain rights to
death benefits from an employer’s retirement plan, unless that right has been
formally waived. Nevertheless, beneficiary conflicts can be time consuming,
expensive, and stressful, especially if large amounts are at stake. Regularly
updating all beneficiary forms can spare your loved ones from fighting what
might wind up being a losing battle.
Paired Plans
- · In most 401(k) and similar plans, an amount left by a participant who has not received benefits will automatically go to the surviving spouse.
- · If a participant wishes to select a different beneficiary, the spouse must consent by signing a waiver.
- · This waiver must be witnessed by a notary or a plan representative.
No comments:
Post a Comment