Dohnalik v. Somner’s Empirical Analysis
467 F.3d 488 · 2006
Citation profile
1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo · Donna Rae Egelhoff v. Samantha Egelhoff Kate Breiner David Egelhoff · Ridgway v. Ridgway · Gowesky v. Singing River Hospital Systems · Krishna v. Colgate Palmolive Co.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“While limiting ERISA's preemptive force to state statutes and allowing beneficiaries to waive ERISA claims is consistent with Supreme Court precedent-albeit fairly contested-the same waiver analysis cannot apply to the SGLIA in light of Ridgway. "). 1 For the purpose of this Motion, Plaintiffs have not disputed that Betty is the beneficiary of the TSP retirement account. Plaintiffs' argument that Betty waived her interest in the retirement account could only succeed if the state divorce decree could override Congress' purpose in enacting FERSA-to ensure that the beneficiary both receives and is able to make use of those benefits. Plaintiffs' effort to obtain these proceeds-pre- or post-receipt is preempted. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. Action Against TSP and Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board As discussed above, on August 8, 2018, a Complaint was filed against the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board and against Thrift Savings Plan. (1:18-cv-98, ECF No. 2.) And as discussed above, in the Complaint filed in that case, the Plaintiffs alleged that Gregory "executed a TSP-3 change of beneficiary form identifying Plaintiffs as the new beneficiaries of his TSP retirement account.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“whether the designation of an SGLIA policy beneficiary survives a state divorce decree purporting to divest the designee of any such interests.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.