Benford

Regents of University of Cal. v. Benford

Good Law
128 Cal. App. 4th 867·27 Cal. Rptr. 3d 441
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 25, 2005G034108California3,439 words

Opinion

Opinion

Aronson, J.

The Regents of the University of California (Regents) and various pension plans administered by them filed a complaint seeking a declaration that certain antialienation provisions in these pension plans prohibit a nonemployee spouse who predeceases the working spouse from bequeathing his or her community property interest in the plans. The trial court entered summary judgment against defendants, the executor of decedent’s estate and decedent’s children, ruling the antialienation provisions as a matter of law prevent defendants from obtaining an interest in the plans. Defendants appeal the judgment, contending Family Code sections 1100 and 2610 prohibit termination of decedent’s interests in the plans on her death. Defendants further contend sections 1100 and 2610 take precedence over contrary regulations adopted by the Regents despite the grant of autonomy provided under the California Constitution, because the statute was enacted under the Legislature’s general police powers, addressed a matter of statewide concern, and did not pertain solely to internal university affairs. (See Cal. Const., art. IX, § 9.)

We disagree with defendants because the antialienation…

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.