Donna Rae Egelhoff v. Samantha Egelhoff, a Minor, BY and Through Her Natural Parent Kate Breiner, and David Egelhoff (532 U.S. 141)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided March 21, 2001 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 532 U.S. 141 · 121 S. Ct. 1322
- Decided
- March 21, 2001
- Term
- October Term 2000
- Vote
- 7–2
- Majority author
- Justice Thomas
- Issue area
- Federalism
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the Court. A Washington statute provides that the designation of a spouse as the beneficiary of a nonprobate asset is revoked automatically upon divorce. We are asked to decide whether the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 88 Stat. 832, 29 U.S.C. §1001 et seq., preempts that statute to the extent it applies to ERISA plans. We hold that it does. I Petitioner Donna Rae Egelhoff was married to David A. Egelhoff. Mr. Egelhoff was employed by the Boeing Company, which provided him with a life insurance policy and a pension plan. Both plans were governed by ERISA, and Mr. Egelhoff designated his wife as the beneficiary under both. In April 1994, the Egelhoffs divorced. Just over two months later, Mr. Egelhoff died intestate following an automobile accident. At that time, Mrs. Egelhoff remained the listed beneficiary under both the life insurance policy and the pension plan. The life insurance proceeds, totaling $46,000, were paid to her. Respondents Samantha and David Egelhoff, Mr. Egelhoffs children by a previous marriage, are his statutory heirs under state law. They sued petitioner in Washington state court to recover the life insurance proceeds. Respondents relied on a Washington statute that provides: “If a marriage is dissolved or invalidated, a provision made prior to that event that relates to the payment or…
Excerpt of a 18,558-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.