Girlfriend Inherits $1M from Ex-Boyfriend's Pension After 40 Years

Margaret Losinger, formerly known as Margaret Sjostedt, is set to inherit nearly $1 million from her ex-boyfriend Jeffrey Rolison's retirement account.

This unexpected windfall comes almost four decades after their breakup in 1989. The couple had dated in the 1980s, and during that time, Rolison named Losinger as the sole beneficiary of his workplace retirement plan in 1987.

Despite their relationship ending two years later, Rolison never updated the beneficiary designation on his retirement account. As a result, when he passed away at the age of 59 in 2015, Losinger was still listed as the beneficiary.

This oversight has led to a fierce legal battle between Losinger and Rolison's surviving brothers, Richard and Brian, who are contesting her claim to the funds.

The case has highlighted substantial issues regarding outdated or incomplete beneficiary forms, which can lead to unexpected financial outcomes.

Employee benefits lawyers have pointed out that while companies like P&G, where Rolison worked, provide warnings and notifications about beneficiary designations, the ultimate responsibility lies with employees to keep their information up-to-date.

Court documents reveal that Losinger met Rolison while playing frisbee in their early twenties. They moved in together, but their relationship ended after two years when Losinger, desiring marriage and children, decided to move out.

She subsequently married someone else and had children, while Rolison went on to have a long-term partner, Mary Lou Murray.

Following Rolison's death, his brothers discovered Losinger's beneficiary status and initiated legal action against both her and P&G. Despite their efforts, the court sided with Losinger, ruling that the handwritten beneficiary form from 1987 took precedence over any other claims.

The brothers have since appealed the decision, arguing that Rolison may not have fully understood the need to update his beneficiary information for his retirement savings.

This case shows the importance of regularly reviewing and updating beneficiary designations to avoid similar disputes in the future. As Peter Gulia, a lawyer specializing in employee benefits, noted, "Retirement plans are more susceptible to neglect without regular updates, unlike health insurance which prompts yearly re-enrollment."