UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

┐ STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY, │ Plaintiff, │ │ v. │ > No. 21-5562 │ JOEL MICHAEL GUY, JR., │ Defendant-Appellant, │ │ │ CRYSTAL MICHELLE DENNISON; ANGELA CRAIN; │ ALVIN MADERE, JR.; PAULA MADERE KINLER, │ Defendants-Appellees. │ ┘ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee at Greeneville. No. 2:18-cv-00074—Clifton Leland Corker, District Judge.

Argued: January 25, 2024

Decided and Filed: August 19, 2024

Before: GRIFFIN, BUSH, and LARSEN, Circuit Judges. _________________

COUNSEL ARGUED: Aaron Z. Roper, WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. James W. Friauf, LAW OFFICE OF JAMES W. FRIAUF, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: Aaron Z. Roper, WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. James W. Friauf, LAW OFFICE OF JAMES W. FRIAUF, Knoxville, Tennessee, for Appellees Dennison and Crain. Michael Hoover, INTERPLEADER LAW, LLC, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, for Appellees Madere and Kinler. No. 21-5562 Standard Ins. Co. v. Guy, et al. Page 2

_________________

OPINION _________________

LARSEN, Circuit Judge. Joel M. Guy, Jr. brutally murdered his parents with the calculated goal of collecting the proceeds of his mother’s insurance plans. He argues that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) requires that he receive those benefits. The district court disagreed, concluding either that ERISA does not preempt Tennessee’s slayer statute or that the federal common law prevents Guy from benefitting from his murders. Guy now appeals. We AFFIRM.

I.

Around Thanksgiving of 2016, Joel M. Guy, Jr. murdered his mother and father, and then dismembered their remains. The details are horrific, and Guy’s motivation was expressly financial. See State v. Guy, 679 S.W.3d 632, 643–51 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2023), perm. app. denied (Tenn. Nov. 16, 2023), cert. denied, 2024 WL 2262393 (U.S. May 20, 2024). A Tennessee jury found Guy guilty of “two counts of first degree premeditated murder, two counts of felony murder, and two counts of abuse of a corpse.” Id. at 643.

Guy’s mother participated in life insurance and accidental death and dismemberment insurance plans through her employer. She also insured Guy’s father under the dependent provisions of the plans. She named Guy and Guy’s father (Guy, Sr.) as the plan beneficiaries. The plans are governed by ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq. Despite his matricide, Guy claims the proceeds of his mother’s plans.

The district court, interpreting the plan documents, determined that absent Guy’s disqualification, he would be “entitled to the entirety of Mrs. Guy’s death benefits” and “a one- third share of Guy, Sr.’s dependent