Estate of Kensinger v. URL Pharma, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that Ken- nedy does not apply when one potential beneficiary of an ERISA plan has sued another after the plan administrator has 12 No. 25-1859 disbursed the funds
• holding that ERISA did not bar court from ordering decedent’s ex-wife to surrender money she had received through decedent’s pension plan because of her prior agreement to waive the right to those funds
• holding while the plan administrator must distribute benefits to the named beneficiary despite divorce, any post-distribution challenge to the beneficiary’s right to the funds due to her common law waiver would be litigated as an ordinary contract dispute
• distinguishing Boggs from a situation parallel to that at issue here on the basis that Boggs involved a claimed interest in undistributed pension plan benefits
• “permitting suits against beneficiaries after benefits have been paid does not implicate any concern of expeditious payment or undermine any core objective of ERISA”
• in case of first impression, court decides that estate may bring action directly against beneficiary to recover proceeds paid to her pursuant to beneficiary designation form

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).