Waller

Waller v. Blue Cross

Good Law
32 F.3d 1337
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 5, 1994No. 92-55487California5,347 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Norris, J.

Plaintiffs-appellants brought this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et. seq. (“ERISA”), alleging that defendants-appel-lees breached their fiduciary duty to the plan by imprudently choosing annuity providers to cover plan liabilities as part of terminating plaintiffs’ plan. Without opinion, the district court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm in part and reverse in part.

I

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In 1986 Blue Cross of California (“Blue Cross”) terminated its retirement plan (the “Retirement Plan” or “Plan”) by using approximately $62 million of the Plan’s assets to purchase annuities for Plan participants and beneficiaries from Executive Life Insurance Company (“Executive Life”) and Provident National Assurance Company (“Provident”). 1 After purchasing the annuities, Blue Cross obtained a reversion of the residual assets, totalling approximately $32 million.

Plaintiffs represent participants and beneficiaries who are eligible (or will become eligible) to receive retirement benefits from the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.