Who’s the Beneficiary? The Courts Provide A Roadmap For Plan Administrators

by King & Spalding
Contact

[author, Donna Edwards, Atlanta, +1 212 572 2701, dedwards@kslaw.com.]

In 2009, the US Supreme Court provided a roadmap for plan administrators to follow when determining the proper beneficiary under an ERISA-covered employee benefit plan.  The Court, in Kennedy v. Plan Administrator for DuPont Savings and Investment Plan, et al 1, held  that the administrator of an ERISA-covered employee benefit plan need only look to the governing plan documents to determine the proper plan beneficiary (the “plan documents rule”).

The Kennedy Case

In the Kennedy case, William Kennedy, a participant in DuPont’s tax-qualified retirement plan, designated his wife, Liv, as his primary beneficiary on the plan’s prescribed beneficiary designation form.  The couple later divorced, and Liv gave up under the divorce decree (which did not qualify as a “qualified domestic relations order” (“QDRO”)) any right related to William’s plan benefits.  However, although the plan permitted a beneficiary to submit a “qualified disclaimer” (as described under Internal Revenue Code Section 2518) of plan benefits, Liv did not submit such a disclaimer waiving her plan benefits, and William did not change his beneficiary designation under the plan.  When William died in 2001, both Liv’s and William’s estate claimed his plan benefit.  The plan administrator decided that Liv was the proper beneficiary and paid William’s plan benefit to her.  The estate sued the plan administrator and DuPont. 

The Supreme Court found in favor of Liv, holding that the plan administrator and DuPont were correct in looking only to the governing plan documents, and not the divorce decree, to determine the proper plan beneficiary.  The Court explained that requiring the plan administrator to look only to the plan documents would provide the greatest degree of certainty for both plan administrators and participants and would prevent plan administrators from having to evaluate waivers and other extrinsic evidence to determine the proper beneficiary.

Open Issues  

An issue left open by the Supreme Court in the Kennedy case was the effect of a beneficiary’s waiver of plan benefits made in a manner consistent with plan documents.  We suspect such a waiver, if permitted by and made in accordance with plan documents, should be treated as part of the plan documents and thus given effect. 

In addition, the Court in the Kennedy case stated that its holding did not address a situation in which the plan does not provide an opportunity for a beneficiary to disclaim his or her plan benefit. 

However, the recent case of Boyd v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. 2 presented the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals with the opportunity to consider just such a case.  In the Boyd case, a participant in an ERISA-covered life insurance plan, Emma, designated her husband, Robert, as her plan beneficiary in accordance with the plan’s terms.  In the event a participant failed to designate a beneficiary, the plan provided that benfits would be distributed to the participant’s estate.  The plan did not specify any procedure for beneficiaries to follow to waive their benefits. 

Emma and Robert later separated and entered into a separation agreement in which Robert waived any claim to Emma’s life insurance benefits.  Although the plan allowed participants to change their beneficiary at any time by sending a written request to the plan administrator, Emma failed to take this step.  Upon Emma’s death, the plan administrator distributed the life insurance benefits to Robert.  Emma’s estate sued, claiming eligibility to the benefits on the theory that Robert relinquished his rights to the benefits.   

The 4th Circuit held in the Boyd case that the plan documents rule does not hinge on whether a plan provides for a formal waiver procedure, and that the plan administrator properly paid the plan benefits to Robert in accordance with Emma’s beneficiary designation on file with the plan.  The Court noted that Robert did not wish, in fact, to refuse his benefits.

The Court also explained that an ERISA plan beneficiary always has the option to refuse benefits at the moment of distribution.  Thus, the only way a plan really could provide no means for a beneficiary to renounce an interest in benefits would be if the plan somehow prevented the beneficiary from refusing to take the benefit. 3

Finally, the Supreme Court in the Kennedy case noted that the estate contended that requiring a plan administrator to distribute benefits in conformity with plan documents will allow a beneficiary who murders a participant to obtain benefits under the terms of the plan.  However, the Court stated that the “slayer” case was not before it, and thus the Court did not address it.             

Insights

We see a couple of insights for plan administrators from the Kennedy and Boyd cases.  First, plan administrators should look only to plan documents, including any QDROs, waivers or disclaimers permitted by and made in accordance with the plan documents, in determining the beneficiary of a participant’s plan benefit.  Although a third party may have an appealing argument that he or she, as opposed to the participant’s properly designated beneficiary or alternate payee, should receive the plan benefit, the plan administrator’s fiduciary obligation is to follow the plan documents, and the Kennedy case shows that the plan administrator should not consider evidence extrinsic to those plan documents.

In addition, plan administrators should establish clear plan provisions and procedures for beneficiary designations and effectively communicate those provisions and procedures to plan participants, including the effect (if any) of a divorce on beneficiary designations.  Plan administrators should also encourage participants to carefully consider beneficiary designations and to revise them as needed.

King & Spalding would be happy to assist you with any questions you have about properly determining beneficiaries under your ERISA plans. 

1 129 S.Ct. 865 (2009).

2 636 F.3d 138 (4th Cir. 2011).

3 (See also Matschiner v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co., 622 F.3d 885 (8th Cir. 2010), reaching same result)

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© King & Spalding | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

King & Spalding
Contact
more
less

King & Spalding on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
Feedback? Tell us what you think of the new jdsupra.com!