>In the ruling, the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts found the estate’s claim did not relate to the ERISA-governed disability benefit plan. However, in upholding many of the estate’s claims against the employer, the court also found the same claims of intentional causing emotional distress were preempted by ERISA when asserted against the plan’s insurer, according to Washington-based legal publisher BNA.
>The court made the preemption determination in claims against the insurer because the estate only sought individual damages, and under ERISA, fiduciary breach claims must be brought on behalf of the plan itself.
>Additionally, on both the employer and insurer front, the court found ERISA preempted separate claims made by the estate that the employer and the insurer breached their common law fiduciary duties in their capacities as the plan’s administrator and insurer when the participant was discharged without notice following the expiration of her disability benefits.
The case is Estate of Palanzi v. Bell Atlantic Corp., D. Mass., No. 02-10940-RWZ, 3/24/03.
« ICMA Unveils Spanish Online Site