Legal Opinion

Seaman v. Johnson

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided March 4, 2004No. 02-1208PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

NORRIS, Circuit Judge.

This declaratory judgment action requires us to determine the proper beneficiary of a life insurance policy valued at $47,500. Because the policy formed part of an “employee benefit plan,” we look to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq. (“ERISA”), in order to resolve the dispute. The owner of the policy, Carl Johnson, Sr., worked for General Motors and married plaintiff, Antoinette Seaman, sometime before 1969, when he designated her as the policy’s beneficiary. Although the couple divorced in 1976, he never amended that…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Egelhoff v. Egelhoff Ex Rel. BreinerSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  2. Daniel v. Green v. Ameritech Corporation and Ameritech Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2000
  3. Albert ALLEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999
  4. 21 Employee Benefits Cas. 1341, Pens. Plan Guide (Cch) P 23937j Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Julie A. Marsh, Dana Lyn Weaver and James R. Marsh, IIICourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
  5. Elizabeth L. Rouse v. Daimlerchrysler Corporation Uaw Non-Contributory PlanCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Julia v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2004
  2. Smith v. Iron Workers Dist. Council of S. Ohio & Vicinity Pension TrustDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 2018
  3. Willie Somerville v. United States of AmericaDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 2026

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API