696 F.3d 788
8th Cir.2012Background
- Robert J. Johnson died without naming a benefi ciary under his Unum life insurance policy; the estate pursued basic-life benefits (granted) and accidental-death benefits (denied).
- Unum alleged Johnson contributed to his death by careless motorcycle driving under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 304.012 (2000).
- The estate administrator did not appeal the denial of the accidental-death claim; the estate’s sole beneficiaries are Johnson’s children: A.J., D.M., and B.M.
- The children’ s attorney contends timely notice of the denial was not received, and the children sought to file a second accidental-death claim or appeal the estate’s denial.
- The district court dismissed the children’s suit for lack of standing; the children appeal contending they are ERISA beneficiaries with standing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do the children have ERISA standing as beneficiaries? | Johnson's children may become entitled to benefits under the facility-of-payment clause. | Standing requires actual designation or colorable entitlement; the estate’s denial defeated colorable entitlement. | No standing; children lack colorable entitlement. |
| Does the facility-of-payment clause render the children ERISA beneficiaries? | Right to pay the surviving family members makes children beneficiaries. | Clause does not create ERISA-beneficiary status absent a valid designation and appeal of the estate claim. | Not a beneficiary under ERISA. |
| Does the lack of appeal of the estate’s denial affect the children’s standing? | Estate’s non-appeal should not bind children with standing limitations. | Estate’s decision not to appeal precludes the children from having a reasonable or colorable claim to benefits. | Estate’s non-appeal bars standing; district court correct. |
Key Cases Cited
- Wilson v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 55 F.3d 399 (8th Cir. 1995) (standing as a jurisdictional issue, de novo review)
- Great Rivers Habitat Alliance v. Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency, 615 F.3d 985 (8th Cir. 2010) (standards for reviewing Rule 12(b)(1) dismissals; presumption of truth to pleadings)
- Steger v. Franco, Inc., 228 F.3d 889 (8th Cir. 2000) (standing determined as of suit commencement; pleadings viewed in light favor of nonmovant)
- Crawford v. Roane, 53 F.3d 750 (6th Cir. 1995) (colorable claim required for ERISA beneficiary status)
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, 489 U.S. 101 (1989) (definition of participant and beneficiary under ERISA)
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pac. Ry. Co. v. Schendel, 270 U.S. 611 (1926) (estate-bound judgments; effects on beneficiaries and executors)