1
(Slip Opinion)
OCTOBER TERM, 2008
Syllabus
NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is
being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued.
The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been
prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader.
See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U. S. 321, 337.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Syllabus
KENNEDY, EXECUTRIX OF THE ESTATE OF KENNEDY,
DECEASED v. PLAN ADMINISTRATOR FOR DUPONT
SAVINGS AND INVESTMENT PLAN ET AL.
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 07–636. Argued October 7, 2008—Decided January 26, 2009
The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), as
relevant here, obligates administrators to manage ERISA plans “in
accordance with the documents and instruments governing” them, 29
U. S. C. §1104(a)(1)(D); requires covered pension benefit plans to
“provide that benefits . . . may not be assigned or alienated,”
§1056(d)(1); and exempts from this bar qualified domestic relations
orders (QDROs), §1056(d)(3). The decedent, William Kennedy, par-
ticipated in his employer’s savings and investment plan (SIP), with
power both to designate a beneficiary to receive the funds upon his
death and to replace or revoke that designation as prescribed by the
plan administrator. Under the terms of the plan, if there is no sur-
viving spouse or designated beneficiary at the time of death, distribu-
tion is made as directed by the estate’s executor or administrator.
Upon their marriage, William designated Liv Kennedy his SIP bene-
ficiary and named no contingent beneficiary. Their subsequent di-
vorce decree divested Liv of her interest in the SIP benefits, but Wil-
liam did not execute a document removing Liv as the SIP beneficiary.
On William’s death, petitioner Kari Kennedy, his daughter and the
executrix of his Estate, asked for the SIP funds to be distributed to
the Estate, but the plan adm