Alfred Branco Edward Branco Steven Branco v. Ufcw-Northern California Employers Joint Pension Plan

Dissenting.

The majority reaches its holding by relying on our decision in Ablamis v. Roper, 937 F.2d 1450 (9th Cir.1991), and two recent Supreme Court decisions, Boggs v. Boggs, 520 U.S. 833 , 117 S.Ct. 1754 , 138 L.Ed.2d 45 (1997) and Egelhoff v. Egelhoff, 532 U.S. 141 , 121 S.Ct. 1322 , 149 L.Ed.2d 264 (2001). The District Court, however, already properly distinguished Ablamis and Boggs , and Egelhoff is likewise distinguishable.

In each of these three cases, a plan participant or beneficiary, upon the death of their spouse, suddenly saw their interest in benefits they expected at that time divested and defeated by state law. Ablamis, 937 F.2d at 1452 ; Boggs, 520 U.S. at 836-37 , 117 S.Ct. 1754 ; Egelhoff, 121 S.Ct. at 1325-26 . The circumstances in the present case are different. Neither when Anna died nor at any later point in time did California state law suddenly divest Alfred of any benefits he expected at that time. On the contrary, Alfred had long ago given up any expectation in these benefits when he stipulated to the divorce settlement order explicitly granting Anna 47.07% of the benefits “for as long as they are payable to or on behalf of’ Alfred. Under these…

Opinion by Judge RAWLINSON; Dissent by Judge PREGERSON.

OPINION

This case sits at the intersection of the Employee Retirement Income Security *1156 Act (“ERISA”) and California’s community-property statutes. We must decide whether ERISA preempts a state law which allows a predeceased spouse’s interest in her ex-husband’s pension plan to pass to her heirs. In this case of first impression, we hold that state law must yield. Accordingly, we REVERSE and REMAND.

BACKGROUND

Alfred Branco (“Branco”), is a participant in the UFCW-Northern California Employers Joint Pension Plan (the “Plan”). On July 1, 1998, Branco was eligible for retirement benefits in the amount of $594.17 per month. Branco and his former wife, Anna Branco (“Anna”), had previously stipulated to a court order granting Anna a 47.07% community property interest in Branco’s pension benefits. The order required payments to continue “for so long as they were payable to or on behalf of [Branco].” Anna died before any pension payments were payable to Branco. Anna was survived by Steven and Edward Branco (“Steven and Edward”), her two adult sons.

Based upon its interpretation of the court order and applicable law, the…

279 F.3d 1154 Alfred BRANCO; Edward Branco; Steven Branco, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UFCW-NORTHERN CALIFORNIA EMPLOYERS JOINT PENSION PLAN, Defendant-Appellee. No. 00-15884. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted October 9, 2001. Filed February 11, 2002. John A. DeRonde, Jr., Fairfield, California, for the plaintiff-appellant. J. Thomas Bowen and Florence E. Culp, Davis, Cowell & Bowe, LLP, San Francisco, California, for the defendant-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California; Claudia Wilken, District Judge, Presiding. Before: PREGERSON and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges, and CHARLES WEINER, * Senior District Judge. Opinion by Judge RAWLINSON; Dissent by Judge PREGERSON. OPINION RAWLINSON, Circuit Judge. 1 This case sits at the intersection of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA") and California's community property statutes. We must decide whether ERISA preempts a state law which allows a predeceased spouse's interest in her ex-husband's pension plan to pass to her heirs. In this case of first impression, we hold that state law must yield. Accordingly, we REVERSE and REMAND.…