5 C.F.R. § 831.601
Purpose and scope
(a) This subpart explains the annuity benefits payable in the event of the death of employees, retirees, and Members; the actions that employees, retirees, Members, and their current spouses, former spouses, and eligible children must take to qualify for survivor annuities; and the types of evidence required to demonstrate entitlement to provide survivor annuities or qualify for survivor annuities.
(b) Unless otherwise specified, this subpart, except §§ 831.682 and 831.683 and the provisions relating to children's survivor annuities, only applies to employees and Members who retire under a provision of law that permits election of a reduced annuity to provide a survivor annuity.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1982–1992 · leading case: Billie Brush v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 982 F.2d 1554 (Fed. Cir. 1992).
Billie Brush v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 982 F.2d 1554 (Fed. Cir. 1992). “Brush has correctly interpreted 5 C.F.R. § 831.601 (e) (1984) and its effect on her situation; the effect of the divorce on the annuity is governed by the law in effect at the time of the divorce.”
Gloria Money v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., & Betty J. Money, Intervenor, 811 F.2d 1474 (Fed. Cir. 1987). “” * 5 C.F.R. § 831.601 (b) (1983). Because the CSRA does not define “wife” or “marriage”, OPM has since 1979 used a uniform definition of “marriage” to decide between competing claimants.”
Lois J. Gilman v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 743 F.2d 881 (Fed. Cir. 1984). “5 C.F.R. 831.601(a) and (c)." 5 In rejecting petitioner's second ground for reversal, the MSPB distinguished the factual situation in Jones from that in the instant case.”
Roxie P. Jones v. United States of Am., Civil Serv. Comm'n, 680 F.2d 1138 (7th Cir. 1982). “5 C.F.R. § 831.601 . The Government argues that his failure to do so constituted notice to the Commission that he did not desire to provide a survivor benefit to his wife.”
— 5 C.F.R. § 831.601(a) — 1 case
Lois J. Gilman v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 743 F.2d 881 (Fed. Cir. 1984). “5 C.F.R. 831.601(a) and (c)." 5 In rejecting petitioner's second ground for reversal, the MSPB distinguished the factual situation in Jones from that in the instant case.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.