423 F. App'x 53
2d Cir.2011Background
- Leak filed ERISA claims in the SDNY alleging violations of 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. and moved through dismissal procedures in the district court.
- The district court granted dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), applying de novo review under Ashcroft v. Iqbal and Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly.
- The court noted ERISA requires exhaustion of administrative remedies before filing suit unless exhaustion would be futile.
- Leak admitted she consciously chose not to exhaust and instead proceeded in federal court, citing objections to pursuing administrative remedies.
- Leak also asserted state-law wage claims for prevailing wages and holiday, sick, and vacation pay over three years, which the court did not consider because they were not raised below.
- This court affirmed the district court’s decision, holding the ERISA claims were properly dismissed for failure to exhaust, and the forfeited state-law claims were not considered.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether ERISA claims were properly dismissed for failure to exhaust | Leak contends exhaustion should be excused or not required. | Defendants argue exhaustion was required and not satisfied. | Yes; dismissal affirmed for failure to exhaust. |
| Whether state-law wage claims were preserved or forfeited | Leak asserts wage claims existed for three years. | Defendant argues claims were forfeited for not being raised below. | Forfeited; not considered on appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Paese v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., 449 F.3d 435 (2d Cir. 2006) (exhaustion favored in ERISA cases; futility exception)
- Kennedy v. Empire Blue Cross & Blue Shield, 989 F.2d 588 (2d Cir. 1993) (exhaustion policy in ERISA cases favoring exhaustion)
- Pani v. Empire Blue Cross Blue Shield, 152 F.3d 67 (2d Cir. 1998) (affirmative defense may be raised on a 12(b)(6) motion when facially apparent)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (U.S. 2009) (plausibility pleading standard)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (U.S. 2007) (rejected plausibility standard; requires enough facts for claim to be plausible)
- Matson v. Bd. of Educ. of the City Sch. Dist. of N.Y., 631 F.3d 57 (2d Cir. 2011) (pleading standards in Second Circuit applying modern standard)