Residents of Illinois can rest a bit easier after a recent federal appellate court decision, knowing that their spouses will not benefit financially from causing their untimely deaths. In Miscevic v. Estate of M.M., the Seventh Circuit addressed whether a woman who killed her husband would still be entitled to his pension benefits due to a conflict between Illinois and federal law.

Woman kills husband, claims pension benefits

In January 2014, Anka Miscevic killed her husband. The criminal court, however, found that she was legally insane at the time of the incident and thus found her not guilty of first-degree murder. The husband was a union laborer who had earned a vested pension benefit from the Laborer’s Pension Fund prior to his death. After the criminal trial, Anka and the child of her and her late husband, thirteen-year-old M.M., sought to collect the pension benefits as the designated beneficiaries.

The Fund brought an action to determine the appropriate beneficiary of the funds. The estate of M.M. argued that pension benefits fall under the Illinois slayer statute, while Anka argued that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), preempts Illinois’ statute, requiring the plan administrator to pay benefits to her. Alternatively, Anka claimed that the statute was inapplicable because she was found not guilty for the murder by reason of insanity.

The Seventh Circuit holds no conflict between ERISA and the Illinois slayer statute

The Illinois Probate Act’s “slayer statute,” 755 ILCS 5/2-6, provides that a “person who intentionally and unjustifiably causes the death of another shall not receive any property, benefit, or other interest by reason of the death.” Instead, the property will be distributed as if that intended beneficiary had died before the decedent.

ERISA was intended by Congress to control the arena of employee benefit plans and preempts or supersedes any conflicting state law in that area. However, the Seventh Circuit held that slayer statutes are outside of ERISA’s purview. The Seventh Circuit found that the phrase “relate to” in the ERISA preemption clause does not include slayer statutes because they “are an aspect of family law, a traditional area of state regulation” Such laws, the court held, predate ERISA, and Congress did not clearly express that ERISA should address and preempt such laws.

The insanity defense does not entitle you to benefits in Illinois

The Seventh Circuit also determined that, under Illinois law, a person can “intentionally and unjustifiably” kill someone under the slayer statute even if they lack the “capacity to appreciate the criminality of conduct” per the insanity defense to criminal conviction. Thus in this case, the killer was not entitled to the victim’s pension benefits. Notably, other state courts have held that the insanity defense does apply as a defense to slayer statutes, such that a person innocent of murder by way of insanity may still inherit from the victim.