Legal Opinion
Oddino v. Oddino
California Supreme Court
Decided July 28, 1997No. S055819PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WERDEGAR, J.
Under provisions of the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq.; hereafter ERISA), private retirement plans may, pursuant to a state court’s domestic relations order, pay a portion of an employee participant’s retirement benefits directly to the employee’s former spouse or dependents, if and only if the state court order meets certain specifications. Such an order is a “qualified domestic relations order” (hereafter a QDRO). (29 U.S.C. § 1056(d)(3).)1
In this case, we address two questions relating to ERISA and the division of…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Pilot Life Insurance v. DedeauxSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- LOCKHEED CORP. Et Al. v. SPINKSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Boggs v. BoggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- MacK v. KuckenmeisterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Geiger v. Foley Hoag LLP Retirement PlanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2008
- Caverly v. GrayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Torres v. TorresHawaii Supreme Court · 2003
- Keiffer v. Bechtel Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1998
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.