Skip to main content

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

9th CircuitFebruary 11, 2002No. 00-15884Cited 20 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Pregerson, Rawlinson, Weiner
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment for the pension plan and remanded the case, holding that ERISA preempts California community property law allowing a deceased former spouse's pension interest to pass to her heirs.

What This Ruling Means

**Pension Rights and Divorce: Who Gets What When Someone Dies?** This case involved three brothers (the Brancos) who fought with a union pension plan over who was entitled to pension benefits after a complicated family situation. A former spouse of one of the pension participants had died, and there was a dispute about whether her share of the pension benefits should go to her heirs or remain with the pension plan. The key issue was whether California state law about dividing property in divorce (community property law) could determine who gets pension benefits, or whether federal pension law (ERISA) takes priority. The appeals court ruled that federal pension law overrides California's community property rules when it comes to pension benefits. The court sent the case back to the lower court to reconsider the decision with this principle in mind. **Why This Matters for Workers:** This ruling clarifies that federal law, not state divorce laws, generally controls what happens to pension benefits. Workers going through divorce should understand that pension rights may be handled differently than other assets like houses or bank accounts. It's important to work with professionals who understand federal pension rules when dividing retirement benefits in divorce proceedings.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.