Oregon Teamster Employers Trust v. Hillsboro Garbage Disposal, Inc.

Oregon Teamster Employers Trust (“OTET”) appeals the grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendants Hillsboro Garbage Disposal, Inc. (“Hillsboro Garbage”), Robert Henderson (“Henderson”), and the Estate of Darrol Jackson (“Jackson”). The district court, adopting the findings of. a magistrate judge, granted summary judgment in favor of Defendants on (1) OTET’s breach of contract claims because the court found those claims to be preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. (“ERISA”); and (2) OTET’s restitution and specific performance claims because the court concluded that those claims were not cognizable under ERISA as they sought legal — not equitable — relief.

I. Facts & Procedural History

OTET is an Employer Health and Benefit Plan governed by ERISA. OTET provides health and welfare benefits to the employees whose employers have entered into collective bargaining agreements with Joint Council No. 37 of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, and local union affiliates.

In September 2003, Hillsboro Garbage and Teamsters Local Union No. 305 (“Union”) entered into a…

concurring:

Oregon Teamster Employers Trust (“OTET”)’s primary argument on appeal is that the district court erred in concluding that its claim for breach of contract was preempted by ERISA. In particular, OTET argues that, like the trust in Providence Health Plan v. McDowell, 385 F.3d 1168 (9th Cir.2004), it is merely “attempting, through contract law,” to enforce a contractual provision that is incorporated into the ERISA plan. Id. at 1172 . The panel opinion distinguishes McDowell on the ground that here, unlike in McDowell , “analysis of the terms of the ERISA plan is ... required.” Op. at 1156.1 agree that McDowell can be distinguished from this case, but the distinction is narrow and unconvincing. I think the better course would be to take this case en banc to reverse McDowell. McDowell was wrong when it was decided and is wrong today.

As the panel opinion observes, ERISA has a broad preemption clause, “one of the broadest preemption clauses ever enacted by Congress.” Security Life Ins. Co. of America v. Meyling, 146 F.3d 1184 , 1188 (9th Cir.1998) (quoting Evans v. Safeco Life Ins. Co., 916 F.2d 1437, 1439 (9th Cir.1990)). ERISA “supersede^] any and all State laws insofar…

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

OREGON TEAMSTER EMPLOYERS No. 13-35555

TRUST,

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 3:11-cv-01487- v. ST

HILLSBORO GARBAGE DISPOSAL,

INC.; ROBERT E. HENDERSON; ESTATE OPINION

OF DARROLL JACKSON,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon Michael H. Simon, District Judge, Presiding

Argued and Submitted May 8, 2015–Portland, Oregon

Filed September 8, 2015 OTET .V HILLSBORO GARBAGE DISPOSAL

Before: William A. Fletcher and Andrew D. Hurwitz, Circuit Judges, and Michael M. Baylson, * Senior District Judge.

Opinion by Judge Baylson; Concurrence by Judge W. Fletcher

SUMMARY **

Employee Retirement Income Security Act

The panel affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Hillsboro Garbage Disposal in an action brought against a subscribing employer by a health and benefit plan that was governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.

The plan provided health and welfare benefits to workers pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement between a union and the employer,…