The Illinois Appellate Court recently decided a case that emphasized the importance of beneficiary designations on retirement accounts in connection with a divorce. The decision affirms that in Illinois, divorce alone does not automatically revoke beneficiary designations on retirement accounts, and highlights how important it is to use specific language in divorce agreements to waive beneficiary interests and the need to update beneficiary designations after major life events like divorce.
The case is Mowen v. Kelly, 2025 IL App (4th) 240906, and it involved a dispute over beneficiary designations for retirement accounts after a divorce. Raymond Earl Mowen (plaintiff) sued Jami M. Kelly (defendant), his deceased son’s ex-wife, seeking to be declared the sole beneficiary of his son’s retirement accounts. The trial court granted summary judgment for the plaintiff, which the defendant appealed.
Key Facts
Matthew Mowen (the decedent) had designated the defendant (his ex-wife) as primary beneficiary and the plaintiff as secondary beneficiary of his retirement accounts during his marriage. After divorcing in 2015, the decedent did not change these designations before his death in 2022. The divorce judgment awarded the decedent any retirement accounts in his name alone.
Legal Analysis
The appellate court found that awarding ownership of the accounts to the decedent (Matthew) in the divorce judgment did not terminate the defendant ex-wife’s expectancy interest as a beneficiary. The court distinguished between ownership interest and expectancy/beneficial interest, citing precedent that an ex-spouse’s rights as beneficiary are only extinguished by specific language in a divorce decree. The divorce decree judgment in this case lacked such specific language waiving future claims against the decedent’s property.
Ruling on Waiver
The court held that the unambiguous divorce judgment should be interpreted based solely on its language, without considering external evidence of intent. By agreeing to award the accounts to the decedent as part of the divorce, the court held that the defendant ex-wife did not waive her expectancy interest as a beneficiary under the retirement account, as ownership and expectancy are distinct interests that can coexist.
Illinois Trust Code
The court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that Section 605(b) of the Illinois Trust Code automatically terminated the defendant ex-wife’s interest as a beneficiary. The plaintiff failed to provide evidence that the retirement accounts were trusts governed by this law, as required for it to apply.
Conclusion and Disposition
The appellate court reversed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for the plaintiff. It remanded the case with instructions to deny the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and grant the defendant’s motion instead. This ruling effectively upholds the original beneficiary designations, allowing the defendant ex-wife to receive the retirement account proceeds as the primary beneficiary.
Significance
This case affirms that in Illinois, divorce alone does not automatically revoke beneficiary designations on retirement accounts. It highlights the importance of specific language in divorce agreements to waive beneficiary interests and the need to update beneficiary designations after major life events like divorce.
Attorney Antonio DeBlasio has been selected by Super Lawyers® in 2008 and in each year from 2014 through 2025. No more than 5% of Illinois attorneys receive this distinction. Mr. DeBlasio has over 30 years of experience as an Illinois attorney, representing businesses, individuals, employees, employers, estates and beneficiaries of estates in Illinois. For information on scheduling a consultation, call DeBlasio Law Group at (630) 560.1123, or you may reach us through our firm’s website at www.DGLLC.net/contact.