John Loffredo v. Daimler AG, 666 F. App'x 370

Background

Plaintiffs are former Chrysler executives who participated in an unfunded “top-hat” Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (SRP) funded through a Rabbi Trust; Rabbi Trust assets remained subject to employer creditors.
DaimlerChrysler/Chrysler allegedly began buying annuities for active employees (2005–06) but not for most former employees; Chrysler later sold to Cerberus and Chrysler LLC filed bankruptcy in 2009, after which Rabbi Trust assets were used in bankruptcy and plaintiffs lost SRP benefits.
Plaintiffs sued in Michigan state court (2010) asserting state-law claims including promissory estoppel, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, and an age‑discrimination claim under Michigan’s Elliott‑Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA). Defendants removed to federal court.
The district court dismissed most claims as preempted by ERISA; on appeal this court (2012) affirmed dismissal except for the age‑discrimination claim, holding ERISA’s savings clause preserves state claims to the extent they “mirror” the ADEA.
On remand plaintiffs sought to amend to add ERISA claims and later filed an amended complaint asserting only ELCRA age discrimination; the district court disallowed ERISA claims (law‑of‑the‑case/futility), dismissed the ELCRA claim as preempted because plaintiffs had not met the ADEA filing deadline, and denied leave to add allegations about an EEOC charge.
Plaintiffs appealed; the Sixth Circuit affirmed: (1) denial of leave to add ERISA claims, (2) dismissal of ELCRA age claim as preempted because it was untimely under the ADEA, and (3) denial of leave to amend to add Piedra’s EEOC charge allegations.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether district court abused discretion by denying leave to add ERISA claims on remand	Loffredo: should be allowed to replead ERISA §1132(a)(1)(B) and §1132(a)(3) claims based on alleged trust breaches	Defendants: law‑of‑the‑case and prior rulings made such amendment futile; plaintiffs previously failed to plead trust‑provision violations and cannot show current possession of trust assets	Affirmed — denial not error: prior appellate ruling rendered amendment futile and plaintiffs still failed to allege facts supporting §1132 claims
Whether ELCRA age‑discrimination claim is preempted by ERISA when filed after ADEA limitations period but within Michigan’s longer limitations period	Loffredo: ELCRA claim should survive because it is a state cause of action and plaintiffs complied with Michigan’s statute of limitations	Defendants: ERISA’s savings clause saves state laws only to the extent they mirror federal statutes; an untimely ADEA claim cannot be mirrored — thus ELCRA is preempted to the extent it exceeds ADEA limitations	Affirmed — ERISA preempts the ELCRA claim because it is untimely under the ADEA; preserving the longer state SOL would not further enforcement of the federal scheme under Shaw
Whether district court abused discretion by denying leave to amend to add allegations about Piedra’s EEOC charge	Loffredo: Piedra filed an EEOC charge within the ADEA period; those facts would reasonably grow from the charge and cure timeliness defect	Defendants: Piedra’s charge names Chrysler Group, LLC and alleges post‑bankruptcy conduct distinct in time, actors, and allegations from plaintiffs’ pre‑bankruptcy claims	Affirmed — denial not an abuse: the EEOC charge alleged different conduct, employer, and timeline and would not reasonably prompt investigation into plaintiffs’ earlier claims

Key Cases Cited

Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, 463 U.S. 85 (1983) (ERISA savings clause preserves state laws only to the extent they are necessary to enforce a federal statute)
Great‑West Life & Annuity Ins. Co. v. Knudson, 534 U.S. 204 (2002) (limits on equitable relief under ERISA §1132(a)(3))
In re IT Group, Inc., 448 F.3d 661 (3d Cir. 2006) (describing top‑hat plans and rabbi trusts)
Loffredo v. Daimler AG, [citation="500 F. App'x 491"] (6th Cir. 2012) (prior panel opinion addressing preemption and remanding ELCRA claim)
Nolan v. Otis Elevator Co., 505 A.2d 580 (N.J. 1986) (state age‑discrimination claim untimely under federal law may be preempted by ERISA)
Warren v. Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers, 729 F. Supp. 563 (E.D. Mich. 1989) (applies Nolan to hold ELCRA preempted to extent its limitations exceed federal period)
Orton v. Johnny's Lunch Franchise, 668 F.3d 843 (6th Cir. 2012) (standard of review for denial of leave to amend vs. futility)
Dixon v. Ashcroft, 392 F.3d 212 (6th Cir. 2004) (expected‑scope‑of‑investigation test for EEOC charge coverage)