Legal Opinion
Burns v. Orthotek, Inc. Employees' Pension Plan & Trust
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided September 15, 2011No. 10-1521PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SYKES, Circuit Judge.
This case requires us to decide a dispute over the pension benefits of the late Dr. Richard Burns. Before his death Dr. Burns designated his three sons as beneficiaries. But because the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) guarantees surviving spouses certain benefits, this designation is only effective if his widow, Cheryl Burns, consented. She signed a written consent form, but after her husband died, she claimed her consent was invalid because it was not witnessed, as required by ERISA. The pension plan found her consent valid and denied her claim for…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Mildred Johnson v. Lashanda Smith, Leonard Smith and Carolyn HallCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2002
- Ponsetti v. GE Pension PlanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
- Williams v. Aetna Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2007
- Maurine M. Holt v. William W. WinpisingerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1987
- Love v. National City Corp. Welfare Benefits PlanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2009
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Ann Bogie v. Joan AlexandraSangerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2013
- Randy Cohen v. American Security Insurance, CCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2013
- Barton v. Zimmer, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2011
- Nathson Fields v. City of ChicagoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2020
- Donald Fessenden v. Reliance Standard Life InsuraCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.