Mason v. Continental Group, Inc
| Citation | 474 U.S. 1087,106 S.Ct. 863,88 L.Ed.2d 902 |
| Decision Date | 21 January 1986 |
| Docket Number | No. 85-847,85-847 |
| Parties | John MASON et al. v. CONTINENTAL GROUP, INC., et al |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
In this case, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled that beneficiaries of an Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) plan must exhaust internal plan remedies before suing plan fiduciaries on the basis of an alleged violation of duties imposed by the statute. Although this ruling is consistent with the law of the Seventh Circuit, see Kross v. Western Electric Co., 701 F.2d 1238 (1983), it is at odds with a decision of the Ninth Circuit, Amaro v. Continental Can Co. 724 F.2d 747 (1984), which held that plaintiffs alleging a statutory violation (as opposed to a mere denial of benefits owing under an ERISA plan) need not exhaust internal remedies.* The Third Circuit has noted the existence of this conflict but failed to take a direct position on it, see Barrowclough v. Kidder, Peabody & Co., 752 F.2d 923, 939, n. 15 (1985), although that court's acceptance of the notion that statutory ERISA claims are normally not arbitrable seems to reflect agreement with the Ninth Circuit's approach. See id., at 941.
I believe that the Court should grant certiorari in this case in order to resolve the uncertainty over the existence of an exhaustion requirement in cases of this kind. The increasing significance of ERISA litigation is apparent from the growing number of such cases that appear on our docket; in a field so productive of federal litigation, the need for clear procedural rules governing access to the federal courts is imperative. Moreover, because the coverage of particular ERISA plans frequently extends to beneficiaries in more than one State—and, no doubt, in more than one judicial circuit—differences in the rules governing access to federal court for the purpose of pressing a claim under ERISA may have the troubling effect of encouraging forum shopping by plaintiffs. Accordingly, the conflict among the Circuits over the issue of an exhaustion requirement under ERISA can hardly be passed over as an unimportant one unworthy of this Court's attention. I therefore dissent from the denial of certiorari.
* Cf. Amato v. Bernard, 618 F.2d 559 (CA9 1980) (...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State of Md. Deposit Ins. Fund Corp. v. Billman
... ... Billman was the founder of EPIC and a controlling principal in the EPIC group. Crysopt is a holding company wholly owned by Billman ... MDIF obtained a ... Appraisals for the first mortgage loans originated by CSL were arranged through Continental Appraisal Group (CAG), a company in which Billman and McCuistion held minority interests. Hewitt ... ...
-
United Paperworkers v. International Paper Co.
...and statute-based claims. See Mason v. Continental Group, Inc., 763 F.2d 1219 (11th Cir.1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1087, 106 S.Ct. 863, 88 L.Ed.2d 902 (1986); Kross, 701 F.2d at Kross has been criticized or questioned in other cases. See, e.g., Amaro, 724 F.2d at 752 ("We find Kross to b......
-
Allen v. American Home Foods, Inc.
...The circuits are split as to whether exhaustion is required prior to suit in federal court. Mason v. Continental Group, Inc., ___ U.S. ___, 106 S.Ct. 863, 88 L.Ed.2d 902 (White, J., dissenting). In the Seventh Circuit, exhaustion of administrative remedies has been required, Kross v. Wester......
-
Santana v. Deluxe Corp.
...Kross, 701 F.2d at 1243-45, and Mason v. Continental Group, Inc., 763 F.2d 1219, 1227 (11th Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1087, 106 S.Ct. 863, 88 L.Ed.2d 902 (1986), with Zipf v. AT & T Co., 799 F.2d 889, 891-93 (3d and Amaro v. Continental Can Co., 724 F.2d 747, 751-52 (9th Cir.1984).......
-
Erisa: Fumbling the Limitations Period
...261 (1985). 221. See supra notes 169-84 and accompanying text. 222. See Lampf, 501 U.S. at 357. 223. See Mason v. Cont'l Group, Inc., 474 U.S. 1087 (1987) (White, J., dissenting). 224. See Lampf, 501 U.S. at 357. 225. See id. at 358. 226. See N. Star Steel Co. v. Thomas, 515 U.S. 29, 35 (19......
-
The Extraterritorial Reach of Section 10(b): a Wolf Hunt Off Wall Street
...and Morrison itself."). 373. The circuit split incentivizes private plaintiffs in these cases to forum shop. Mason v. Cont'l Grp., Inc., 474 U.S. 1087, 1087-88 (1986) (White, J., dissenting) (noting that, because circuit differences in rules "may have the troubling effect of encouraging for......
-
Labor Law - Stephen W. Mooney and Leigh Lawson Reeves
...Assocs. Group Health Plan, 908 F.2d 897 (11th Cir. 1990); Mason v. Continental Group, Inc., 763 F.2d 1219 (11th Cir. 1985), cert, denied, 474 U.S. 1087 (1986)). 60. Id. (citing 29 U.S.C. Sec. 1144(a) (1988)). 61. Id. (citations omitted). 62. Id. 63. 50 F.3d 956 (11th Cir. 1995). 64. Id. at ......