providing death benefits - Effect of divorce or annulment. A. If, after entering into a written contract in which a beneficiary is designated or provision is made for the payment of any death benefit (including life insurance contracts, annuities, retirement arrangements, compensation agreements, depository agreements, security registrations, and other contracts designating a beneficiary of any right, property, or money in the form of a death benefit), the party to the contract with the power to designate the beneficiary or to make provision for payment of any death benefit dies after being divorced from the person designated as the beneficiary or named to receive such death benefit, all provisions in the contract in favor of the decedent's former spouse are thereby revoked. Annulment of the marriage shall have the same effect as a divorce. In the event of either divorce or annulment, the decedent's former spouse shall be treated for all purposes under the contract as having predeceased the decedent. B. Subsection A of this section shall not apply: 1. If the decree of divorce or annulment is vacated; 2. If the decedent had remarried the former spouse and was married to said spouse at the time of the decedent's death; 3. If the decree of divorce or annulment contains a provision expressing an intention contrary to subsection A of this section; 4. If the decedent makes the contract subsequent to the divorce or annulment; 5. To the extent, if any, the contract contains a provision expressing an intention contrary to subsection A of this section; or 6. If the decedent renames the former spouse as the beneficiary or as the person or persons to whom payment of a death benefit is to be made in a writing delivered to the payor of the benefit prior to the death of the decedent and subsequent to the divorce or annulment.
C. For purposes of subsection A of this section, "death benefit" shall not include: 1. Any interest in property in which the decedent's former spouse has an interest as a joint tenant; or 2. Any interest in property in which the decedent's former spouse has a beneficial interest in an express trust created by the decedent during the decedent's lifetime for which provision is made in Section 175 of Title 60 of the Oklahoma Statutes. D. This section shall apply to any contract of a decedent made and entered into on or after November 1, 1987 and to depository agreements and security registrations made and entered into on or after September 1, 1994. Added by Laws 1987, c. 201, § 2, eff. Nov. 1, 1987. Amended by Laws 1989, c.181, § 10, eff. Nov. 1, 1989; Laws 1994, c. 313, § 4, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
17
cases (
6 in the last 5 years), 1987–2024 · leading case:
Ghoussoub v. Yammine, 2022 OK 64 (Okla. 2022).
Ghoussoub v. Yammine, 2022 OK 64 (Okla. 2022).
· cites it 18× “Jean Bernard were divorced and that 15 O.S.2011 § 178 APPEAL PREVIOUSLY RETAINED; TRIAL COURT'S JUDGMENT REVERSED; REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS.”
Shebester v. Triple Crown Insurers, 826 P.2d 603 (Okla. 1992).
· cites it 2× “, the provision for the automatic revocation of a beneficiary upon divorce at 15 O.S.Supp. 1989 § 178 A; its pertinent terms are: "If, after entering into a written contract in which provision is made for the payment of any death benefit .”
Tubbs v. State, ex rel. Teachers' Ret. Sys., 57 P.3d 571 (Okla. 2002).
· cites it 2× “15 O.S.1991 § 178 Contracts designating former spouse as beneficiary or providing death benefits — Effect of divorce or annulment A.”
Pepper v. Peacher, 742 P.2d 21 (Okla. 1987).
· cites it 2× “" Although inapplicable to the present case, it should be noted that passage of 15 O.S. § 178, currently pending, would alter the outcome of a subsequent case with similar facts even under the majority opinion.”
First Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. of McAlester v. Coppin, 827 P.2d 180 (Okla. Civ. App. 1992).
· cites it 5× “contended that the designations of beneficiaries under both the Life Insurance and Mortgage Insurance were revoked pursuant to 15 O.S.Supp.1987 § 178. Additionally, P.R.”
Matter of Est. of Bruner, 864 P.2d 1289 (Okla. Civ. App. 1993).
· cites it 3× “Bruner, under that new contract, gave up and assigned all of her rights, titles and interests, including future interests, in the insurance policies, the IRA account and the one-half of pension and profit sharing plan which are subject to this proceeding; that any funds she…”
Williams v. Old Am. Ins. Co., 907 P.2d 1105 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “In July 1989, when Old American paid the proceeds to Karla, it was acting in accord with 15 O.S.Supp.1987 § 178 (effective November 1, 1987), which stated that, if an insured individual died after being divorced from the named beneficiary of a policy, all provisions in favor of…”
First Nat. Bank & Trust v. Coppin, 827 P.2d 180 (Okla. Civ. App. 1992).
· cites it 5× “contended that the designations of beneficiaries under both the Life Insurance and Mortgage Insurance were revoked pursuant to 15 O.S.Supp. 1987 § 178. Additionally, P.”
Johnson v. Snow, 2022 OK 86 (Okla. 2022).
· cites it 2× “¶23 Finally, Children's allegations of error that the trial court did not give effect to the revocation upon divorce statute, 15 O.S.2011 § 178 See id. As such, there was not a beneficiary designation to revoke.”
Mounce v. Mounce, 921 F. Supp. 712 (N.D. Okla. 1996).
“The parties further agree that, because his benefits are governed by ERISA, any state law claim based upon Okla.Stat. tit. 15, § 178 (1981) (statute pursuant to which all provisions in death benefits contracts in favor of ex-spouse are revoked by operation of law) is preempted.”
Williams v. Old Am. Ins. Co., 882 P.2d 576 (Okla. Civ. App. 1994).
· cites it 3× “made the claim, 15 O.S.Supp.1987 § 178 was in effect. That statute provided: A.”
Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 178(A): 2 cases
Matter of Est. of Bruner, 864 P.2d 1289 (Okla. Civ. App. 1993).
“Bruner, under that new contract, gave up and assigned all of her rights, titles and interests, including future interests, in the insurance policies, the IRA account and the one-half of pension and profit sharing plan which are subject to this proceeding; that any funds she…”
Okla. Stat. tit. 15, § 178(B): 1 case
Williams v. Old Am. Ins. Co., 907 P.2d 1105 (Okla. Civ. App. 1995).
“In July 1989, when Old American paid the proceeds to Karla, it was acting in accord with 15 O.S.Supp.1987 § 178 (effective November 1, 1987), which stated that, if an insured individual died after being divorced from the named beneficiary of a policy, all provisions in favor of…”
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.