Case Explained: IN HER CAPACITY AS CO-PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF PHILIP LOUIS CLOUD V. CLOUD, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-06-16 Docket: 3:22-cv-00263-HZ The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment holding that Tracy Lampron Cloud is not entitled to her deceased husband Philip Louis Cloud’s ERISA benefits because she is his “slayer.” The court applied a de novo standard of review and determined that, under both Oregon and California law, a final conviction for intentional murder conclusively establishes an individual as a slayer who cannot benefit from the decedent’s pension. The court further held that even if state slayer statutes were preempted by ERISA, federal common law prohibits a person from financially benefiting from their own murder, citing *Mutual Life Insurance Co. of N.Y. v. Armstrong*. Additionally, the court affirmed the application of issue preclusion under the Full Faith and Credit Act, noting that Cloud’s guilt for second-degree murder was established in state criminal proceedings where she had a full and fair opportunity to litigate. The court also rejected Cloud’s unpleaded constitutional claims regarding her Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights, denied her request for appointed counsel due to a failure to show exceptional circumstances, and affirmed the denial of leave to amend her complaint to assert a counterclaim based on a rescinded settlement agreement as futile and unduly delayed. Consequently, Cloud remains barred from receiving the estate’s retirement benefits, and the district court’s judgment stands without further proceedings. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.