Owens

Owens v. Automotive MacHinist

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 12, 200907-35253California4,815 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. Introduction

For more than thirty years, Norma Owens (“Norma”) and Phillip R. Owens, Sr. (“Phillip”) maintained a “quasi-marital” relationship in the state of Washington. In 2004, Norma and Phillip separated. On August 19, 2005, the Superior Court of King County, Washington, issued a state court order (“Order”) awarding Norma a fifty-percent interest in the pen- sion benefits being paid to Phillip by Automotive Machinist Pension Trust (“Automotive Trust” or “Trust”).

Automotive Trust declined to implement the Order on the ground that it was not a valid Qualified Domestic Relations Order (“QDRO”) under § 1056 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(1). Specifically, the Trust argued (1) that the Order did not relate to “marital property rights” pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(3)(B)(ii)(I); and (2) that Norma was not an “Alter- nate Payee” under 29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(3)(K) because she did not qualify as an “other dependent.”

We agree with the Washington Federal District Court that, because Norma and Phillip lived together in a quasi-marital relationship for more than thirty years, the Superior Court’s Order does in fact relate to…

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.