Barnett v. Barnett
Texas Supreme Court
67 S.W.3d 107 (2001)
- Written by Whitney Kamerzel , JD
Facts
Christopher Barnett (defendant) and Marleen Barnett (plaintiff) were married. During the marriage, Christopher obtained a life-insurance policy through his employer and paid the premiums with payroll deductions. Christopher and Marleen separated and initiated divorce proceedings. Christopher changed the beneficiary of his life insurance to his mother, Dora Barnett (defendant), and executed a new will in which he gave his entire estate to Dora. Before the divorce was concluded, however, Christopher died. The life-insurance proceeds were approximately $170,000. Marleen sued Christopher’s estate and Dora, arguing that the proceeds were community property and that Christopher committed fraud on the community by changing his beneficiary of community property to Dora. Dora argued that the life-insurance policies were separate property and that even if they were community property, Marleen’s community-property interest and the claim for fraud were preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The trial court held that ERISA preempted Marleen’s community-property interest. The court of appeals reversed. Dora appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Owen, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.