The S.C. Court of Appeals issued an opinion earlier this week which addressed a spouse’s waiver of his/her interest in the other spouse’s retirement account. In Stribling v. Stribling, the wife entered into a settlement agreement which provided that the husband would receive both of his IRA accounts. He later remarried and died, having never changed the beneficiary designation on either account from his former spouse to his subsequent wife (now widow).
The widow, as personal representative of Husband’s estate, brought an action against the former wife seeking a court order requiring her to waive her claim to the husband’s IRA’s pursuant to the Divorce Decree. The Court found that the Divorce Decree was clearly and sufficiently comprehensive to establish that the first wife waived any interest in the husband’s retirement accounts, which included both of the IRA accounts at issue in this case.
The Court also explained that a separation agreement may preclude a named beneficiary from recovery of an expectancy interest in either of two ways:
- A named beneficiary may be precluded from recovery when a separation agreement specifically addresses a particular policy/account providing an expectancy interest and the agreement contains language of release applicable to the policy/account; or
- When a separation agreement provides general language of release without specifically addressing the policy/account providing the expectancy interest, a named beneficiary may be precluded from recovery when the policy/account owner intended for the general waiver to apply to the expectancy interest.
You can read the full text of this opinion by clicking here.