[WSBAPT] PERS Pension Benefits to Spouse?

Fri Jan 8 13:52:32 PST 2016

Your research should begin with ERISA, joint and several survivor
benefits.  The court cases have found that ERISA overrides state law and
provides that unless the new spouse has signed a waiver of benefits, the
new spouse is entitled to the account.

Sincerely,

*Chris J. Moore*
Christopher J. Moore, JD, CPA, AEP®, EPLS*
Creason, Moore, Dokken & Geidl, PLLC
Lawyers
1219 Idaho Street, POB 835
Lewiston, Idaho 83501-0835
Phone: 208-743-1516; Fax: 208-746-2231
Website: www.cmd-law.com

*Certified as an Estate Planning Law Specialist by the Estate Law
Specialist Board, Inc., the only estate planning certification entity
approved by both the American Bar Association and the Idaho State Bar
Association.
_______________________________________________
*-- Note -- *The information contained in this e-mail transmission is
confidential and may also be a legally privileged communication. This
information is intended for the exclusive and private use of the
addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
notified that any use, disclosure, dissemination, distribution (other than
to the addressee(s)), copying or taking any action because of this
information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in
error, please notify the sender immediately. Thank you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

*From:* wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:
wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] *On Behalf Of *James B. Dolan
*Sent:* Friday, January 08, 2016 1:17 PM
*To:* 'WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv' <wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com>
*Subject:* [WSBAPT] PERS Pension Benefits to Spouse?

Former client, now deceased, was a state employee for 15 years before
passing away rather suddenly.  He listed his former girlfriend/partner as
Beneficiary of his DRA pension.  He was aware of this designation long
after they broke off their relationship, and they remained friends.

He married another woman six weeks before he died.  In a conversation with
DRS, the Personal Rep was informed that  *all* of the funds remaining in
decedent’s pension go to the new spouse, regardless of the Beneficiary
designation to former girlfriend.

Before I engage in the research and / or call DRS to discuss, has anyone
else ever dealt with a similar scenario or is anyone aware of RCW or WAC
related to this issue?  As the current Personal Rep, my client does not
have a dog in this potential dispute, however, the result seems inequitable
to me.

FYI: the decedent did make changes to the beneficiary designation on his
IRA, from former girlfriend to current spouse.  He did not change his Will
to include his new spouse, so she is claiming one half of his separate
property as an omitted spouse.

Any thoughts appreciated.

Jim Dolan

===================

*Jones Butler Dolan, PS*

*www.jbdolan.com <http://www.jbdolan.com>*

*www.jonesbutlerdolan.com <http://www.jonesbutlerdolan.com>*

*Mount Vernon*

P.O. Box 2784

415 Pine Street

Mount Vernon, WA 98273

Telephone: 360-336-2939

Facsimile: 360-336-2949

*Stanwood*

P.O. Box 458

10027 - 269th Place NW (SR 532)

Stanwood, WA 98292

Telephone: 360-629-3833

Facsimile: 360-629-6253

*From:* wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [
mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>]
*On Behalf Of *Eric Nelsen
*Sent:* Thursday, January 07, 2016 4:57 PM
*To:* WSBA Probate & Trust Listserv
*Subject:* Re: [WSBAPT] Ademption by Extinction

Several of us on the listserv were on a legislative subcommittee last year,
looking at this issue. Currently the ademption rules in Washington are up
in the air – no real Washington case law, so would have to fall back on
persuasive common-law authority from other jurisdictions.

I would look at Am.Jur. or C.J.S., but off the top of my head I think the
best result here is that the insurance proceeds should go to the recipient
of the coin collection. The fact that the collection was stolen rather than
voluntarily disposed of by the testator, and that the insurance proceeds
are completely identifiable because they have not yet been paid, makes the
tracing from coin collection to insurance proceeds quite simple. Giving the
proceeds to the specific beneficiary does not diminish the Estate that goes
to other beneficiaries, or alter the testator's estate planning in any
fashion. Therefore, giving the proceeds to the beneficiary comes closest to
honoring the testator's intent.

Sincerely,

Eric

Eric C. Nelsen

SAYRE LAW OFFICES, PLLC

1320 University St

Seattle WA 98101-2837

phone 206-625-0092

fax 206-625-9040

*From:* wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [
mailto:wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <wsbapt-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com>]
*On Behalf Of *David Spencer
*Sent:* Thursday, January 07, 2016 4:37 PM
*To:* wsbapt at lists.wsbarppt.com
*Subject:* [WSBAPT] Ademption by Extinction

Dear Forum Members:

I am seeking Washington authority on these facts:

Testator’s will makes specific gift of coin collection to devisee.
Collection is stolen before Testator’s death but is insured.  However,
Testator dies without filing the insurance claim but Executor has now done
so.  Executor intends to give the insurance proceeds to the devisee of the
collection.  I have not seen the will but client is asking who gets the
insurance money.

Reutlinger in Washington Law of Wills and Intestate Succession is a bit
unclear to me as to whether Washington allows the specific devisee receive
the insurance proceeds.

I’ve looked at the Washington ademption decisions and not found clear
guidance.  I am aware other states have statutes that would give the
specific devisee the insurance proceeds (such as New York).

Thanks for any information you may provide.

David D. Spencer

Attorney at Law

1621 Lake Mount Drive

Snohomish, WA 98290

T 206.650.7048 or 360.862.9101

F 206.508.3999

spencer at davidspencerlaw.com

spencerlaw at hotmail.com

www.davidspencerlaw.com

This e-mail is intended only for the individual(s) or entity(s) named
within the message. This e-mail might contain legally privileged and
confidential information. If you properly received this e-mail as a client
or retained expert, please hold it in confidence to protect the
attorney-client or work product privileges. Should the intended recipient
forward or disclose this message to another person or party, that action
could constitute a waiver of the attorney-client privilege. If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible to
deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
prohibited by the sender and to do so might constitute a violation of the
Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. section 2510-2521. If this
communication was received in error we apologize for the intrusion. Please
notify us by reply e-mail and delete the original message without reading
same. Nothing in this e-mail message shall, in and of itself, create an
attorney-client relationship with the sender.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbapt/attachments/20160108/8336f4ea/attachment.html>