A federal judge has ruled that the children of a late Amazon employee may continue their legal challenge against their uncle, who they allege exerted undue influence to become the sole beneficiary of their father’s life insurance policies.
U.S. District Judge Donald C. Nugent denied a motion for summary judgment filed by Gerald McGill, clearing the way for Megan and Shannon McGill—daughters of the late Joseph McGill—to pursue their claim in federal court. The lawsuit centers around allegations that Gerald manipulated his terminally ill brother into removing his children as beneficiaries of his Prudential Insurance Co. of America life insurance plans, just prior to his passing from pancreatic cancer in 2024.
Although Gerald McGill argued that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) preempted the children’s claims, the judge disagreed. Citing Tinsley v. GMC, a key 2000 Sixth Circuit decision, Judge Nugent emphasized that ERISA does not bar fact-specific claims involving allegations of undue influence.
“Whether an individual has exercised undue influence over another is a highly fact-intensive inquiry,” the judge wrote, highlighting the importance of examining the mental state of Joseph McGill and the nature of his relationship with his brother at the time the beneficiary change was made.
In their April 2024 complaint, the McGill children claim their father suffered significant cognitive decline leading up to his death, which left him vulnerable to manipulation. The case, which also names Prudential and Amazon as defendants, is currently in the discovery phase, focusing on the late Joseph McGill’s health and mental capacity, as well as Gerald McGill’s role in the policy changes.
The plaintiffs seek a court declaration recognizing them as the rightful beneficiaries of their father’s life insurance policies.
Judge Nugent noted that “genuine issues of material fact persist” regarding both Joseph McGill’s mental capacity and the potential undue influence exerted by Gerald McGill, thus denying the uncle’s request to dismiss the case.
