Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada v. Jackson, Case No. 3:14-cv-41
| Decision Date | 05 August 2016 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 3:14-cv-41 |
| Parties | SUN LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY OF CANADA, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD E. JACKSON, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of Ohio |
This matter is before the Court on cross-motions for judgment by Plaintiff Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada ("Plaintiff" or "Sun Life"), Doc. #50, Defendant, Counter-Claimant and Cross-Claimant Sierra N. Jackson ("Sierra"), Doc. #51, and Defendant Richard E. Jackson ("Richard"). Doc. #53. Sun Life seeks a declaratory judgment that it properly paid proceeds of an insurance policy managed by Sun Life ("Policy") on the life of a Bruce Jackson ("Bruce") to Richard, Bruce's uncle. In the alternative, it seeks to enjoin Richard from dissipating the Policy proceeds and to obtain other equitable relief against Richard. Doc. #1. Sierra, Bruce's daughter, seeks a declaratory judgment that she was the proper payee of the Policy proceeds. Also, she seeks recovery of those proceeds, and statutory damages against Sun Life for alleged violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq. Doc. #4. Richard, appearing pro se, seeks damages, including attorney fees, to compensate him for the "loss of production time and income-generating resources." Doc. #53, PAGEID #954. Also, Sierra moves to strike a letter filed by Richard with the Court on January 2, 2016, Doc. #59, which she claims contains inadmissible evidence. Doc. #61. Finally, Sierra moves, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2), to dismiss without prejudice her crossclaim against Richard. Doc. #62. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
For the reasons set forth below, Sierra's motion for judgment is OVERRULED with respect to her claim for statutory damages and SUSTAINED in all other respects. Sun Life's motion for judgment is OVERRULED with respect to its claim for declaratory judgment, and is SUSTAINED IN PART and NOT RULED UPON IN PART with respect to its claim for injunctive relief against Richard. Richard's motion for judgment on the administrative record is OVERRULED. Sierra's motion to strike is OVERRULED AS MOOT, and her motion for voluntary dismissal of her crossclaim against Richard is SUSTAINED.
Bruce and Bridget L. Jackson ("Bridget") married on December 31, 1993, and Sierra, the only child of the marriage and Bruce's only child, was born on February 9,1995. Doc. #29-1, ¶¶ 3-4, PAGEID #576. Beginning on or about November 1, 2003, Bruce, at the time an employee of Samaritan Health Partners, now a division of Premier Health Partners ("Employer" or "Premier"), began to participate in an employee benefit plan sponsored by Premier and governed by ERISA ("Plan"). The Plan included the Policy, which came under the management of Sun Life as of January 1, 2008. Doc. #19-1, PAGEID #254-81, Doc. #19-2, PAGEID #282-301. The Policy provided for $48,000 in basic benefits and $191,000 in optional, or supplemental, benefits. Doc. #19-2, PAGEID #300. Bruce designated Richard as the beneficiary of the Policy. Id., PAGEID #309.
On January 20, 2006, a final Judgment Entry - Decree of Divorce was entered in the Miami County, Ohio, Court of Common Pleas as between Bridget and Bruce ("Decree" or "Jackson Decree"). Doc. #29-1, PAGEID #576. The Decree included a provision that Bruce and Bridget would "be spending near equal time with the child." Id., ¶9, PAGEID #577. The Decree incorporated by reference a Separation Agreement and Shared Parenting Plan ("Separation Agreement"), which was entered into by Bridget and Bruce on January 13, 2006. Id., PAGEID #576, 585. Article IX of the Separation Agreement mandated that:
In order to secure the obligation of the parties to support their child during her minority, [Bruce and Bridget] shall maintain, unencumbered, all employer-provided life insurance, now in existence at a reasonable cost, or later acquired at a reasonable cost, naming their minor child as primary beneficiary during her minority, and the obligation to do so shall continue until she (a) reach(es) the age of eighteen (18) or graduates from high school, whichever occurs last. . . .
Id., PAGEID #590. Despite this mandate, Bruce never changed the beneficiary of the Policy from Richard to Sierra.
On February 27, 2013, prior to Sierra graduating from high school, Bruce died. Doc. #19-2, PAGEID #306; Doc. #19-5, PAGEID #396. On July 17, 2013, James D. Brookshire ("Brookshire"), counsel for Sierra, wrote a letter to Sherry Jenkins ("Jenkins"), Employee Benefits Manager for Premier, in an attempt to make a claim for benefits under the Policy. Doc. #19-4, PAGEID #360-61. Brookshire asked Jenkins to provide "any and all forms necessary to claim the basic life insurance benefits and supplemental life insurance benefits." Id., PAGEID #361. On July 19, 2013, Jenkins informed Sun Life National Account Manager Sarah Victory ("Victory") of the correspondence from Brookshire, and also notified Sun Life that Richard, the listed beneficiary, had not yet made a claim for benefits. Id., PAGEID #341-42. On July 30, 2013, Lisa Larson ("Larson"), the Sun Life employee responsible for claims under the Policy, spoke with Bruce's mother, who informed Larson that Sierra had "already set up the estate for [Bruce]." Id., PAGEID #340. That same day, Larson sent a letter to Jenkins and Richard, requesting additional information with respect to Bruce's death and beneficiary designations. Doc. #19-3, PAGEID #322-23. On August 8, 2013, Richard submitted a Death Benefits Claim Packet to Sun Life. Id., PAGEID # 326.
On August 26, 2013, Brookshire sent a letter via certified mail to Victory, renewing Sierra's claim for benefits. Doc. #29-1, PAGEID #574. Brookshire argued that other claims for the Policy proceeds were invalid, because the Decree was a Qualified Domestic Relations Order ("QDRO") under ERISA, and Article IX of the Separation Agreement required Bruce to designate Sierra as the beneficiary. Id., PAGEID #574-75. Thus, Brookshire claimed, under ERISA, Sierra was the lawful beneficiary of the Policy proceeds. Id., PAGEID #575. Brookshire asked for the formsnecessary to complete Sierra's claim, id., and attached file-stamped copies of the Decree and Separation Agreement. Doc. #29-1, PAGEID #576-94. On September 12, 2013, Larson again wrote to Richard and Jenkins, asking for the certified original death certificate and proof, if any, that Bruce had designated Richard as the beneficiary for the Policy's optional proceeds. Doc. #19-3, PAGEID #327-29. On September 24, 2013, Richard sent a certified copy of the death certificate to Larson, Doc. #19-2, PAGEID #306; Doc. #19-3, PAGEID #331, and on October 2, 2013, Sun Life paid the Policy's basic proceeds of $48,784.77 (including interest) to Richard. Doc. #19-3, PAGEID #332-34. In an October 10, 2013, email, Jenkins informed Victory that the "basic life beneficiary that [is] printed on our forms [is] also applicable for the optional life beneficiary." Doc. #19-4, PAGEID #349 (emphasis removed). Thus, because "Bruce name[d] his beneficiary as 100% primary to Richard Jackson[, t]his would be applicable for the basic and optional life benefit." Id. Victory forwarded Jenkins's email to Larson, and on October 15, 2013, Sun Life paid the Policy's optional proceeds of $194,309.79 (including interest) to Richard. Doc. #19-3, PAGEID #335-37.
On November 4, 2013, Joanna Bouthot ("Bouthot"), Sun Life's Manager of Group Life Claims, informed Brookshire that Sun Life had paid the entire Policy proceeds to Richard. Doc. #19-4, PAGEID #354. On November 19, 2013, Brookshire sent an email to Bouthot, claiming that "[a]s a matter of law, the August 26, 2013[,] notice of Ms. Jackson's claim was effective when Sun Life's Cleveland office received it on August 28, 2013." Id., PAGEID #355. Having received Sierra's claim, Brookshire argued, "Sun Life was required to evaluate Ms. Jackson's claims prior to paying any money to Richard Jackson." Id., PAGEID #356. Brookshire again claimed that the Decree was aQDRO, and thus Sierra "has been and remains the sole lawful beneficiary of the Sun Life insurance policies." Id., PAGEID #358 (emphasis in original). Brookshire requested copies of the Policy, the contact information for the Policy's payee and information about the process, if any, by which Sierra could appeal the denial of her claim. Id., PAGEID #358-59. Sun Life filed the present action in this Court on February 6, 2014, seeking a declaratory judgment that it properly paid the Policy proceeds to Richard, and also seeking injunctive relief and interpleader relief. Doc. #1. On February 27, 2014, Sierra filed an answer and counterclaim against Sun Life for judgment, seeking: a declaratory judgment that she was the lawful Plan beneficiary; recovery of benefits; statutory damages; and attorney fees. Doc. #4. Also, Sierra filed a crossclaim against Richard for conversion. Id. On June 2, 2015, the Court sustained Sun Life's motion for voluntary dismissal of Count III (Interpleader Relief) of Sun Life's Complaint. Doc. #46.
Sierra has raised claims...
To continue reading
Request your trial