STUART GRABOIS, IN HIS FIDUCIARY CAPACITY &C., THE NEW YORK CITY DISTRICT
COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS WELFARE FUND, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS, v. KAY JONES AND
ANNIE MARIE JONES, DEFENDANTS.
88 N.Y.2d 254, 667 N.E.2d 307, 644 N.Y.S.2d 657 (1996).
April 2, 1996
USCOA,2 No. 122(1996 NY Int. 65)
Decided April 2, 1996
_________________________________________________________________
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication
in the New York Reports.
PER CURIAM:
In the exercise of this Court's discretion under section 500.17 of
the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.17), we decline to
accept the question certified to us by the United States Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit in this action brought under the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA): Whether a second
spouse whose marriage is void due to the existence of a prior,
undissolved marriage, is nonetheless entitled to some portion of her
or his spouse's death benefits when the second marriage was the result
of a formal ceremony, undertaken in good faith, and the second
marriage continued until the spouse's death.
While we have in general accepted questions certified to us by the
Second Circuit, various factors militate against discretionary review
in the instant case. In particular, we agree with the Second Circuit's
description, in its 500.17 certificate, of the likely rarity of any
recurrence of this issue, a distinctive certiorari factor.
Furthermore, defendant- appellant appears pro se, defendant-respondent
has not submitted a brief and plaintiffs-respondents are mere
stakeholders with no interest in this action other than to dispense
the death benefits to whomever the Court ultimately directs. Thus, we
can expect only limited assistance from the parties in deciding this
issue, which may have precedential significance beyond the ERISA
context.
Finally, the interplay between Federal and State law in interpreting
issues of statutory construction under ERISA is as yet not fully
settled. This issue may thus be more appropriate for resolution in the
first instance by the Federal courts.
Accordingly, acceptance of the certified question should be declined.
SNIPPETS:
COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS WELFARE FUND, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS, v. KAY JONES AND
ANNIE MARIE JONES, DEFENDANTS.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
In the exercise of this Court's discretion under section 500.17 of the Rules of the Court of
as the result of a formal ceremony, undertaken in good faith, and the second marriage continued
While we have in general accepted questions certified to us by the Second Circuit, various
In particular, we agree with the Second Circuit's description, in its 500.17 certificate, of
Furthermore, defendant- appellant appears pro se, defendant-respondent has not submitted a
Thus, we can expect only limited assistance from the parties in deciding this issue, which
the interplay between Federal and State law in interpreting issues of statutory construction
This issue may thus be more appropriate for resolution in the first instance by the Federal
Acceptance of certification of question by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second
Opinion Per Curiam.
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.
|
