Case ID: f-appx_459/html/0651-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

August Marie PARKER, Plaintiff-counter-defendant-3rd-party-defendant-Appellee, v. Alberto ZAVALA; et al., Third-party-defendants-cross-claimants-Appellants, and Kimberly Zavala, Third-party-defendant-cross-claimant, Prudential Insurance Company of America, Defendant-third-party-plaintiff.
    No. 10-17033.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted Nov. 16, 2011.
    
    Filed Nov. 23, 2011.
    Allen James Clark, Clark & Associates, Yuma, AZ, for Plaintiff-counter-defendant-3rd-party-defendant-Appellee.
    Rick Kevin Carter, Esquire, Ben J. Himmelstein, Esquire, Matthew A. Klopp, Wong Fujii Carter, P.C., Phoenix, AZ, for Third-party-defendants-cross-claimants-Appellants.
    Before: NOONAN and BEA, Circuit Judges, and WALTER, Senior District Judge.
    
    
      
       The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
    
      
       The Honorable Donald E. Walter, Senior District Judge for the U.S. District Court for Western Louisiana, sitting by designation.
    
   MEMORANDUM

•This is an appeal from a motion for summary judgment; the facts are not repeated as the parties are familiar with them. We are constrained to interpret 38 U.S.C. § 1970(a) of the Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance Act to require strict compliance with its provisions regarding the designation of beneficiaries. Prudential Ins. Co. v. Perez, 51 F.3d 197, 198-99 (9th Cir.1995). At the time of the insured’s death, the Army had only August Marie Parker listed as a designated beneficiary on file in its records. Appellants proffered no evidence to establish a triable issue of fact as to another properly designated beneficiary, or that the designation of Parker was for some reason invalid. Marks v. United States, 578 F.2d 261, 263 (9th Cir.1978).

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.