CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT |
RUTH MAE CHELF,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA,
Defendant,
ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE FOR THE ASSOCIATES’
HEALTH AND WELFARE PLAN; WAL-MART
ASSOCIATES, INC.,
Defendants-Appellees. |
No. 20-6097 |
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky at Louisville.
No. 3:17-cv-00736—Gregory N. Stivers, District Judge.
Argued: June 10, 2021
Decided and Filed: April 12, 2022
Before: MOORE, CLAY, and STRANCH, Circuit Judges.
_________________________
OPINION
_________________________
JANE B. STRANCH, Circuit Judge. Elmer Chelf, a former employee of Wal-Mart, was
on long-term disability leave when he passed away. His widow, Ruth Mae Chelf, was denied
benefits under his work-based optional term life insurance policy. She brought claims against
Wal-Mart and the Plan Administrator (collectively, Wal-Mart) for breach of fiduciary duty
pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001–1461
(ERISA). Her suit alleges that Wal-Mart breached its fiduciary duty to Mr. Chelf in several
ways, including by assessing certain premiums in error; by failing to inform him that his
premiums were assessed in error; by failing to remit premiums to Prudential to cover his optional
life insurance policy resulting in that policy’s termination; by failing to inform Mr. Chelf that his
accrued paid time off (PTO) could cover his life insurance premiums; and by failing to notify
him of his right to convert his term life insurance policy. Wal-Mart filed a motion to dismiss,
which the district court granted, dismissing Ms. Chelf’s fiduciary breach claims with prejudice.
We AFFIRM in part, REVERSE in part, and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with
this opinion. |
CLICK HERE FOR FULL TEXT |
KEVIN LINDKE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
JOHN D. TOMLINSON and MAT KING, in their official
capacities,
Defendants-Appellees. |
No. 21-2612 |
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Michigan at Detroit.
No. 2:20-cv-12857—Sean F. Cox, Chief District Judge.
Argued: January 26, 2022
Decided and Filed: April 12, 2022
Before: GRIFFIN, DONALD, and BUSH, Circuit Judges.
_________________________
OPINION
_________________________
Plaintiff Kevin Lindke and his ex-girlfriend, Ami Moeller, engaged in a contentious child
custody dispute, during which Moeller obtained a domestic personal protection order (PPO)
against Lindke. After she sued Lindke for violating that PPO, defendant Judge John Tomlinson,
a Michigan probate court judge, agreed and ruled in her favor. Rather than appeal that
determination in Michigan state court, Lindke sued Judge Tomlinson and county sheriff Mat
King in federal court under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seeking to enjoin enforcement of Michigan’s
domestic PPO statute. The district court dismissed the case, concluding that no subject-matter
jurisdiction existed in the case against Judge Tomlinson and that Lindke failed to state a claim
against Sheriff King. We agree and affirm. |
|