Alkhafaji v. Tiaa-Cref

30 A.3d 1100
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided October 13, 2011·No. 135 WAL 2011·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 13th day of October, 2011, the Petition for Alowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. The Petition is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is:

Did the Superior Court err when it reversed the decision of the lower court and held that a change of beneficiary by will was not, as a matter of law, permitted when the notice provision of TIAA-CREF annuity contracts did not clearly and unambiguously preclude a beneficiary designation by will?

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Alkhafaji v. Tiaa-Cref, 30 A.3d 1100 (Pa. 2011).

30 A.3d 1100 (Alkhafaji v. Tiaa-Cref) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Alkhafaji v. TIAA-CREF Individual & Institutional Services, LLC
69 A.3d 219 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2013)
BLASSINGALE v. Pennsylvania Bd. of Probation and Parole
30 A.3d 1100 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2011)