Jackson v. Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund

S.D. Texas

Jackson v. Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund

DecidedOctober 13, 2023

Docket4:23-cv-03023

StatusUnknown

This text of Jackson v. Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund (Jackson v. Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jackson v. Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund, (S.D. Tex. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT October 13, 2023 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk HOUSTON DIVISION

§ TAWANDA A. JACKSON, § § Plaintiff, § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. H-23-3023 § CENTRAL STATES, SOUTHEAST AND § SOUTHWEST AREAS PENSION FUND, § et al., § § Defendants. §

FINAL JUDGMENT

Tawanda Jackson sued the Central States, Southeast, and Southwest Areas Pension Fund and the Estate of Van LaPeal Jackson. (Docket Entry No. 1). Tawanda Jackson and Van LaPeal Jackson divorced in September 5, 1989. In July 2023, Tawanda Jackson sued the Fund and the Estate in state court, asserting that she was entitled to a portion of her ex-husband’s retirement benefits. The defendants moved to dismiss, and Jackson did not respond. This court heard arguments on October 3, 2023, and granted the motion to dismiss. The court explained its reasons in detail on the record and sets them out briefly below. Jackson did not seek to enter a Qualifying Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) until 2023, after the death of her ex-husband. Although the Fifth Circuit has not ruled directly on this topic, there is a consensus among courts, both in this district and beyond, that “a surviving spouse annuity vests on the date of the participant’s death and a proposed QDRO entered posthumously is not enforceable.” Stahl v. Exxon Corp., 212 F. Supp. 2d 657, 669 (S.D. Tex. 2002) (collecting cases); see Guzman v. Commonwealth Edison Co., No. 99-CV-582, 2000 WL 1898846, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 28, 2000) (‘rights to survivor's benefits are fixed as the participant’s death, and a valid QDRO cannot be entered after the participant's death that would expand the liability of the Plan.”); Samaroo v. Samaroo, 193 F.3d 185 (3d Cir. 1999). Because Jackson did not seek entry of a QDRO before her ex-husband’s death, she cannot now enforce her proposed QDRO. Even if she could, because the benefits she seeks were already fully and properly paid long before she sought a QDRO, no funds remained when she did so. There are no benefits that could be payable under a newly entered QDRO. (Docket Entry No. 3 at 8). Her claim is without merit. This civil action is dismissed with prejudice. This is a final judgment.

SIGNED on October 13, 2023, at Houston, Texas.

Lee H. Rosenthal United States District Judge

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT October 13, 2023 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk HOUSTON DIVISION

§ TAWANDA A. JACKSON, § § Plaintiff, § v. § CIVIL ACTION NO. H-23-3023 § CENTRAL STATES, SOUTHEAST AND § SOUTHWEST AREAS PENSION FUND, § et al., § § Defendants. §

FINAL JUDGMENT

Tawanda Jackson sued the Central States, Southeast, and Southwest Areas Pension Fund and the Estate of Van LaPeal Jackson. (Docket Entry No. 1). Tawanda Jackson and Van LaPeal Jackson divorced in September 5, 1989. In July 2023, Tawanda Jackson sued the Fund and the Estate in state court, asserting that she was entitled to a portion of her ex-husband’s retirement benefits. The defendants moved to dismiss, and Jackson did not respond. This court heard arguments on October 3, 2023, and granted the motion to dismiss. The court explained its reasons in detail on the record and sets them out briefly below. Jackson did not seek to enter a Qualifying Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) until 2023, after the death of her ex-husband. Although the Fifth Circuit has not ruled directly on this topic, there is a consensus among courts, both in this district and beyond, that “a surviving spouse annuity vests on the date of the participant’s death and a proposed QDRO entered posthumously is not enforceable.” Stahl v. Exxon Corp., 212 F. Supp. 2d 657, 669 (S.D. Tex. 2002) (collecting cases); see Guzman v. Commonwealth Edison Co., No. 99-CV-582, 2000 WL 1898846, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 28, 2000) (‘rights to survivor's benefits are fixed as the participant’s death, and a valid QDRO cannot be entered after the participant's death that would expand the liability of the Plan.”); Samaroo v. Samaroo, 193 F.3d 185 (3d Cir. 1999). Because Jackson did not seek entry of a QDRO before her ex-husband’s death, she cannot now enforce her proposed QDRO. Even if she could, because the benefits she seeks were already fully and properly paid long before she sought a QDRO, no funds remained when she did so. There are no benefits that could be payable under a newly entered QDRO. (Docket Entry No. 3 at 8). Her claim is without merit. This civil action is dismissed with prejudice. This is a final judgment.

SIGNED on October 13, 2023, at Houston, Texas.

Lee H. Rosenthal United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Jackson v. Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-central-states-southeast-and-southwest-areas-pension-fund-txsd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack