Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Neither ERISA's anti-alienation provisions not QDRO rules apply to welfare benefit plans

Article Abstract:

The US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit ruled in Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States v. Crysler that a divorce decree did not need to be a qualified domestic relations order to affect beneficiary designation for a welfare benefit plan because ERISA's limitations on alienation do not apply to such plans. In an interpleader action, a widow and a former wife both claimed to be due life insurance proceeds from an employer plan. The Eighth Circuit found that a divorce decree granting the benefits to the former wife did not need to be qualified under ERISA.

Publisher: Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
Publication Name: Tax Management Compensation Planning Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-8607
Year: 1995
Life insurance, Beneficiaries

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Proceeds of a settlement from an ERISA lawsuit are taxable

Article Abstract:

The US 8th Circuit Court of Appeals in Mayberry v. United States held that awards to class action plaintiffs in an ERISA violation suit were includable in the income of those individual plaintiffs. The court held that since ERISA section 502(a)(3) does not recognize suits for personal injuries, awards cannot be excludable from income under IRC section 104(a)(2). This issue has not received uniform judicial treatment and will likely be resolved by the US Supreme Court.

Publisher: Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
Publication Name: Tax Management Compensation Planning Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-8607
Year: 1998
Tax Law, Public Finance Activities, Taxation, Compromise and settlement, Settlements (Law)

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Plan administrator abused discretion in denying benefits based upon erroneous finding

Article Abstract:

This article concerns the case of Crow v. Fortis Benefits Insurance Co. where the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri found that a employee benefits plan administrator abused its discretion by denying long-term disability benefits to a plan participant when the denial was based upon erroneous evidence determined by a benefits appeals committee.

Publisher: Bureau of National Affairs, Inc.
Publication Name: Tax Management Compensation Planning Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0747-8607
Year: 1999
United States

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States, Cases, Employee benefits, Human resource management
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: IRS approves changes in asset valuation method and software for defined benefit plans. PBGC proposes changes in plan benefit valuation rules for single-employer and multiemployer plans after mass withdrawal
  • Abstracts: Resources can yield revenues; information brokering enables law firms to sell library service to others. An embattled profession faces new challenges; the 'information revolution' is leaving librarians behind
  • Abstracts: Navigating the STAA: a survey and recent developments under the anti-retaliation provisions of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act
  • Abstracts: Freedom and Fairness Restoration Act would simplify rules for qualified plans. Supreme Court overturns Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. Schoonejongen
  • Abstracts: Refounding Granada. Pay pressures set to weaken
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.