Fey v. Board of Pensions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

Background

Reverend Danielle Fey worked as a pastor and participated in the Lutheran Church’s group benefits plan. The Board of Pensions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, doing business as Portico Benefit Services and Evangelical Lutheran Church in American Disability Benefits Plan, terminated Fey’s disability benefits after she became unable to work because of fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue.

Fey appealed the termination through three levels of internal administrative review. The Board received and considered the appeals at its office in Minnesota and affirmed the termination each time. Fey then filed this action, alleging breach of contract, bad faith, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and unlawful transaction of disability insurance. The opinion describes the plan as a church plan not regulated by the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act.

Motion to Transfer

The defendants moved to transfer the case to Minnesota based on a forum-selection clause in the plan. One provision stated that, after a participant exhausted the appeals process and remained dissatisfied with the final decision, the participant could bring legal action in the Minnesota Fourth Judicial District Court in Hennepin County, and that any removed action had to be removed to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.

During the hearing, the court requested supplemental briefing about another plan provision concerning Minnesota law and venue. That provision stated that the plan would be interpreted and administered under Minnesota law, to the extent not preempted by federal law, and that all controversies, disputes, and claims arising under the plan would be submitted to the Minnesota Fourth Judicial District Court in Hennepin County.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that a forum-selection clause is mandatory and enforceable when its language clearly requires exclusive jurisdiction. It found that the provision requiring all plan-related controversies, disputes, and claims to be submitted in Minnesota was mandatory. The court concluded that transferring the action to the federal court in Minnesota was the practical course because the other provision required removed cases to go there.

Disposition

The court GRANTED the defendant’s motion to transfer venue. The Clerk was ordered to TRANSFER the case to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota and CLOSE THE FILE in the Northern District of California. The opinion did not decide Fey’s underlying disability-benefits claims.