Ruiz v. Publix Super Markets, Inc.
| Decision Date | 30 March 2017 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 8:17-cv-735-T-24 TGW. |
| Citation | 248 F.Supp.3d 1294 |
| Parties | Arlene RUIZ, Plaintiff, v. PUBLIX SUPER MARKETS, INC., Defendant, Publix Super Markets, Inc., Defendant/Counter–Plaintiff v. Arlene Ruiz, Alexander Perez–Vargas, Andrea Vargas, and Jessica Vargas, Counter–Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida |
Shawn A. Jiles, Jiles Law, P.A., Winter Haven, FL, for Plaintiff.
Daniel Alter, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, Kristie Hatcher–Bolin, Mark Nelson Miller, Lakeland, FL, for Defendant.
This cause comes before the Court on Publix's Motion for Summary Judgment.1 (Doc. No. 34). Plaintiff Arlene Ruiz opposes the motion and asks for summary judgment in her favor instead. (Doc. No. 41). As explained below, Publix's motion is granted.
Summary judgment is appropriate "if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). The Court must draw all inferences from the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-movant and resolve all reasonable doubts in that party's favor. See Porter v. Ray, 461 F.3d 1315, 1320 (11th Cir. 2006) (citation omitted). The moving party bears the initial burden of showing the Court, by reference to materials on file, that there are no genuine issues of material fact that should be decided at trial. See id. (citation omitted). When a moving party has discharged its burden, the non-moving party must then go beyond the pleadings, and by its own affidavits, or by depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, designate specific facts showing there is a genuine issue for trial. See id. (citation omitted).
Irialeth Rizo is a former Publix employee3 who died from cancer on January 19, 2015. During her employment with Publix, Rizo participated in the Publix Super Markets, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan ("ESOP") and the Publix Super Markets, Inc. 401(k) SMART Plan ("401(k) Plan"). The Summary Plan Descriptions for the ESOP and the 401(k) Plan both provide for an initial beneficiary designation via a Beneficiary Designation Card. (Doc. No. 38–1, p. 9, 46). In order to change the designated beneficiary, these plans provide the following directives:
It is important to remember to change your beneficiary designation when the situation calls for it.... If you wish to change your beneficiary(ies), please obtain a Beneficiary Designation Card from your work location's Publix Communication Center and complete, sign and submit it to the Retirement Department, Publix Corporate Office, Lakeland, Florida. Your change of beneficiary designation is not valid under the Plan until the Retirement Department receives and processes the properly completed Beneficiary Designation Card.
(Doc. No. 38–1, p. 11, 47). The plans also provide the following instructions for completing a Beneficiary Designation Card:
Remember that a Beneficiary Designation Card is a legal document. It should not contain mark outs, erasures or correction fluid. It should be typed or printed in ink, and you must sign and date the card. Your beneficiary designation is not valid under the Plan until the Retirement Department receives and processes the properly completed Beneficiary Designation Card.
In October of 2008, Publix received Beneficiary Designation Cards from Rizo changing her prior designated beneficiaries for both her ESOP and 401(k) Plan. (Doc. No. 38–5; Doc. No. 38, ¶ 22). These Beneficiary Designation Cards named (1) her nephew, Alexander Perez–Vargas, (2) her niece, Andrea Vargas, and (3) her niece, Jessica Vargas, as her beneficiaries for both her ESOP and 401(k) Plan. (Doc. No. 38–5; Doc. No. 38, ¶ 22).
In September of 2011, Rizo was diagnosed with cancer. On January 15, 2015, when Rizo was getting her affairs in order after her cancer had progressed, Rizo called Publix to find out how to change her beneficiaries for her ESOP and 401(k) Plan. (Doc. No. 44, depo p. 79, 83). Arlene Ruiz was with Rizo while Rizo made the call on speaker phone.4 (Doc. No. 44, depo. p. 79–82). According to Ruiz, the Publix representative told Rizo that in order to change her beneficiaries, she must do the following:
She must write a letter. And in the letter[,] she must put the person she wants, with their Social Security number.... That she must include her name, her Social Security number, cards5 if she can get ahold of them. The main thing was, they kept emphasizing that the most important part of the letter was to make sure she signed it and dated, that was a must.
(Doc. No. 44, depo p. 86–87). The Publix representative said that the cards really were not important because Rizo was not an active associate at the time. (Doc. No. 44, depo p. 88).
On January 18, 2015, Rizo dictated a letter that Ruiz transcribed. (Doc. No. 44, depo p. 88–90). The letter stated the following:
(Doc. No. 47). After Ruiz drafted the letter, Rizo read it two or three times and then signed and dated it. (Doc. No. 44, depo p. 90). Additionally, Rizo directed Ruiz to put Ruiz's name and Social Security number on two cards. (Doc. No. 44, depo p. 91–92). At some point later, Rizo gave Ruiz a sealed envelope addressed to Publix's corporate office and asked Ruiz to mail the envelope. (Doc. No. 44, depo p. 91–92). Ruiz did not see what was inside the envelope, but she assumed it was the letter she had transcribed. (Doc. No. 44, depo p. 93).
Rizo died on January 19, 2015. Thereafter, Publix received the January 18, 2015 letter from Rizo, as well as the Beneficiary Designation Cards.6 On the signature lines of the Beneficiary Designation Cards, Rizo did not place her signature; instead, she wrote "as stated in letter." (Doc. No. 41, ¶ 22). According to Publix, after it received the letter and cards, Publix did not process the change of beneficiary, because the Beneficiary Designation Cards were not properly filled out, as Rizo had not signed and dated them. (Doc. No. 43, depo p. 19). According to Publix, it returned the Beneficiary Designation Cards to Rizo with a letter explaining why they were being returned. (Doc. No. 43, depo p. 19–21). No such letter from Publix was ever received, despite the fact that other correspondence from Publix was received.7
When Ruiz made a claim for benefits under the ESOP and the 401(k) Plan after Rizo's death, Publix denied her claim, stating the following:
(Doc. No. 46).
Thereafter, Ruiz filed suit against Publix under ERISA for benefits under the ESOP and the 401(k) Plan as Rizo's beneficiary. (Doc. No. 5). In response, Publix filed a counterclaim for declaratory relief, asking this Court to declare the following: (1) that Rizo did not effect a change of beneficiary for her ESOP and 401(k) Plan in favor of Ruiz; (2) that Publix properly denied Ruiz's claim to the proceeds of the ESOP and the 401(k) Plan; (3) that Publix properly distributed the proceeds of the 401(k) Plan to the Vargas Counter–Defendants; (4) that Publix properly distributed 1/3 of the ESOP proceeds to Counter–Defendant Jessica Vargas; (5) that Publix is entitled to distribute the remaining ESOP proceeds to Counter–Defendants Alexander Perez–Vargas and Andrea Vargas; and (6) that Publix owes no duties or obligations to Ruiz.8 (Doc. No. 10).
Both parties move for summary judgment, asking this Court to conduct a de novo review of Publix's decision to deny Ruiz benefits under the ESOP and the 401(k) Plan.9 Under the de novo standard of review, this Court must determine if the decision to deny Ruiz benefits under the plans was "wrong," meaning that this Court disagrees with the decision. See Oliver v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 613 Fed.Appx. 892, 896 (11th Cir. 2015). Under the de novo standard, the Court employs a high level of scrutiny and does not give judicial deference to the decision to deny Ruiz benefits. See Dunn v. Cox, 560 F.Supp.2d 1247, 1253 (M.D. Fla. 2008). After conducting a de novo review, the Court concludes that Publix's decision was not wrong, and as such, Publix is entitled to summary judgment.
Based on the facts construed in the light most...
To continue reading
Request your trial