In Re the Marriage of Baker

Good Law
1988 Cal. App. LEXIS 812·204 Cal. App. 3d 206·251 Cal. Rptr. 126·10 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1094
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 30, 1988A038122California5,354 words

Opinion

Opinion

King, J.

In this case we hold that when a pension plan has been joined as a party in a marital dissolution action and thereafter, despite receipt of a court order awarding the employee’s spouse her community property interest in the plan, pays the entire benefit due under the plan to the employee in a lump sum, the plan must pay the employee’s spouse her community interest. In reaching this determination we also hold that federal law does not preempt state court action dividing marital interests in employee benefit plans, nor does it require that an action to enforce a state court order dividing such benefits be brought in federal court. Congress, in providing concurrent state court jurisdiction for division of pension benefits, must have intended that the states would prescribe the procedures to be followed in state court actions. For this reason, we hold that federal law does not preempt California’s statutory provisions for giving a notice of adverse interest to the plan and for joinder of the plan as a party in a dissolution action.

The IMarine Engineers Beneficial Association (MEBA) Pension Trust appeals from an order requiring it to pay Dorita Baker her community interest…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.