Family Law
Equitable Division of Pension Benefits
Norma and Phillip Owens lived together for more than thirty years but never married. Ms. Owens worked as a homemaker and cared for the couple's two sons while Mr. Owens worked outside the home. When the couple separated, a Washington state court ordered that Ms. Owens was entitled to half of Mr. Owens' pension benefits. But Mr. Owens' pension plan refused to honor the state court order, arguing that federal law prohibited Ms. Owens from receiving the pension benefits, simply because the couple had not legally married.
Ms. Owens challenged the denial, and Legal Voice and cooperating counsel Jonathan Meier filed a friend of the court brief on behalf of Ms. Owens. The Ninth Circuit agreed with our arguments, holding that Ms. Owens was entitled to her share of the pension benefits because the couple had a marriage-like relationship under Washington law and Ms. Owens was a dependent of her former partner. The court also rejected the pension plan's arguments that the federal "Defense of Marriage Act" (DOMA) barred the payment of benefits to Ms. Owens.
This ruling is particularly important for women who devote their working years to keeping the home and raising the family's children while their partner pursues paid employment outside the home. Without a fair and equitable division of pension benefits, many women in these situations would be left in poverty if their relationships end. This ruling will help protect women in any state in the Ninth Circuit that recognizes marriage-like relationships for purposes of property division.
Women's rights. Nothing less.
© 2009–2012 Legal Voice. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy
