Zimmerman v. The Guardian Life Insurance Company of America

Background

Marc Zimmerman sued The Guardian Life Insurance Company of America over alleged miscalculation and misinformation concerning his benefits under his former employer’s benefit plan. The complaint asserted five causes of action: recovery of employee benefits under 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B); equitable relief under 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(3); failure to produce documents; negligent misrepresentation; and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Guardian moved to dismiss the third, fourth, and fifth causes of action. The order addressed only those three claims.

Document-production claim

The court granted Guardian’s motion to dismiss Zimmerman’s third cause of action, which alleged failure to produce documents. The court held that Zimmerman had not alleged facts sufficient to show that Guardian was the plan administrator. The court explained that 29 U.S.C. § 1132(c)(1) applies only to a plan administrator for failures to comply with reporting and disclosure requirements.

The court dismissed the third cause of action without prejudice. It stated that Zimmerman could bring a timely motion to amend if discovery revealed additional facts that changed the analysis.

State-law claims and ERISA preemption

The court denied Guardian’s motion to dismiss the negligent-misrepresentation and intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress claims. Guardian argued that the claims were preempted by ERISA, the federal employee-benefits law.

Relying on Ninth Circuit precedent, the court concluded that the claims were not preempted because they were based on common-law negligence principles and did not have the required connection to or reference to an ERISA plan. The court focused on whether a fiduciary duty attached to the task involved—in this case, calculating benefits—rather than simply on whether Guardian was a fiduciary. The court found that Zimmerman had pleaded a plausible act similar to the conduct discussed in that precedent. The court also understood, based on counsel’s clarification at the hearing, that Zimmerman was bringing the state-law claims in the alternative to his ERISA fiduciary-duty claims.

Other ruling and disposition

The court denied as moot Guardian’s request to strike Zimmerman’s request for a jury trial. Overall, the court granted in part and denied in part Guardian’s motion to dismiss: the document-production claim was dismissed without prejudice, while the negligent-misrepresentation and intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress claims were not dismissed. Guardian was ordered to file an answer within 21 days from the date of the order. The order terminated Docket Number 13.