- Amount
- $482,000 (plan benefit awarded)
- Counsel
- Interpleader Law
- Result for
- The insured's son, our client
- Case
- Zaharopoulos v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.
- Court
- U.S. District Court, Middle District of Georgia
- Docket
- No. 5:22-cv-348 (MTT)
- Decided
- September 6, 2023
- Issue
- Who qualifies as a domestic partner under an ERISA plan's default beneficiary order
The insured had life coverage through her employer’s ERISA plan but never named a beneficiary. The plan’s default order paid a “spouse or domestic partner” first and children next. Her fiancé claimed as her domestic partner, using a declaration he had signed himself. The plan’s administrator first accepted his claim, then reversed after an appeal by her son, and the fiancé sued. The administrator interpleaded the benefit and was dismissed.
We represented the son. The court reviewed the plan’s administrative record and decided the question itself. The plan required a domestic-partner declaration signed by the employee, meaning the insured, and there was no evidence she had signed one. As the court put it, the fiancé “cannot grant to himself that insurable interest after [her] death.”
The court ruled for our client, ordered the benefit paid to him with interest, and entered judgment in his favor.
What it shows. When an employer plan has no named beneficiary, the plan’s own definitions and paperwork decide who is next in line.
Read the court's order
For a detailed legal summary of this decision, see interpleader.com's decisions library.
Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This summary describes the court's ruling; it is not legal advice about any other case.
Back to all results · Interpleader lawsuits · Beneficiary disputes