Leaderboard

Generally, fiduciary duty runs to the plan and its participants, and on the facts as presented, the kids seem neither. And ERISA preempts any attempted non-ERISA claims. Treating the description as a hypothetical, of course.

You have bad facts here. When the participant signs his own name for the spouse, I can see a court accepting a breach of ERISA fiduciary duty argument under the exclusive purpose or prudence rule: A prudent fiduciary in the same situation as this plan administrator would have investigated (or rejected outright) a beneficiary designation when a participant signs for the spouse and there is no POA on file. Also, as a matter of equity, a court could easily shift the legal risk to the plan administrator (they were the ones in the best position to prevent this harm) and should be held accountable.

Did you ask for legal fees? If so, the answer might be an award of zero. If not, you/attorney must determine if you have any opportunity for additional claim. Could this mean something simple like, "your lawyer screwed up"?

The terms of the trust should specify whether or not matters such as proxy voting, tender offers ,and other shareholder matters should be handled by the legal owner (trustee) or another fiduciary or passed through to the beneficial owner (participant). If passed through to the participant, the participant would then direct the trustee concerning any action to take or not take with respect to the matter.

First of all, you should report this paralegal to your state's bar for unauthorized practice of law. Second, the most reasonable interpretation of that language is that the equal division of the accounts is the intended effect of the language and the identification of the approximate value is merely to describe the approximate value of what is divided. However, case law in your jurisdiction may support an interpretation that limits your ex-spouse to the $10,000 value to be divided. Your best option here is to talk to a divorce attorney in your area about your options.