Retired Firefighter Cannot Name Son's SNT as Pension Beneficiary

In a case argued by ASNP member Donald Vanarelli, a New Jersey appeals court rules that a retired firefighter cannot name a third-party special needs trust as the beneficiary of his pension because state law requires that pension payments flow directly to surviving spouses or children of deceased firefighters. Saccone v. Board of Trustees of Police and Firemen's Retirement System (N.J. Super. Ct., App.Div., No. A-1498-11T2, Oct. 24, 2012)(unpublished).

Thomas Saccone, a retired New Jersey firefighter, asked the New Jersey Police and Firemen's Retirement System (PFRS) for permission to name his severely disabled son's special needs trust as the contingent beneficiary of his $4,2454.37 monthly pension. PFRS refused to allow Mr. Saccone to name the trust as a beneficiary, claiming that only widows or children of a firefighter are entitled to the pension benefit and that the statutory definition of a "child" does not include a trust.

After Mr. Saccone requested a formal opinion from the PFRS, an appeals court ruled that the PFRS did not have to issue an advisory opinion at all. However, the Supreme Court of New Jersey overturned the court's decision and required the PFRS to issue the opinion, which it did, denying Mr. Saccone's request. Mr. Saccone appealed, arguing that the pension laws should be liberally construed to assist firefighters' families and that New Jersey public policy favors the creation and funding of special needs trusts.

In an unpublished opinion, the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, upholds the PFRS's denial of Mr. Saccone's request. After analyzing the previous pension statute, which did allow firemen to name other beneficiaries, the court concludes that under the more recent pension system, "[t]he statutorily created benefit is not Saccone's property to bequest and is not assignable; rather, it is [Saccone's son's] property." The court goes on to state, in dicta, that once Mr. Saccone's son begins to receive the benefit, he may be able to pay the benefit into a pooled trust.

For the full text of this decision, go to: https://njlaw.rutgers.edu/collections/courts/appellate/a1498-11.opn.html