Berlin

Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance v. Berlin

Good Law
45 F. App'x 750
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 30, 2002No. 99-16180; D.C. No. CV-98-00585-ROSCalifornia365 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM

The district court did not err by granting summary judgment to Berlin because Great-West Life’s action against Berlin is not cognizable under ERISA.

ERISA authorizes a participant, beneficiary, or fiduciary to bring a civil action to obtain “appropriate equitable relief’ to enforce the terms of the plan. 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (a)(3). GreaL-West Life argues that its action to enforce the reimbursement provision of the Plan is one for “equitable relief’ because it seeks equitable restitution or a constructive trust. We disagree.

In this suit, Great-West is seeking to enforce a contractual obligation to pay money which is a classic action at law and not an equitable claim. See Westaff Inc. v. Arce, 298 F.3d 1164 (9th Cir.2002) (holding § 1132(a)(3) did not authorize an action brought by a plan administrator to enforce a reimbursement provision of an ERISA plan because the substance of the remedy sought was not equitable). The fact the funds sought by Great-West have been placed in a trust account and are specifically identifiable does not transform its action into one for equitable relief. See Arce, at 1166 (concluding a reimbursement action remained an action for money…

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.