From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Piatko v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 10, 1987
134 A.D.2d 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Opinion

November 10, 1987

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Wolfgang, J.

Present — Denman, J.P., Green, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Defendant contends that Special Term erred in denying its motion for summary judgment. It further asserts that plaintiff's causes of action are preempted by the Employee Retirement Security Act of 1974. (ERISA; 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq.)

Plaintiff's complaint alleges that he was a participant in an ERISA pension plan and made application for benefits under the plan which was denied by defendant. He characterizes his causes of actions as sounding in contract and tort. As plaintiff's claims relate to an ERISA-regulated employee benefit plan, they are preempted by ERISA § 514 (a) ( 29 U.S.C. § 1144 [a]; Pilot Life Ins. Co. v. Dedeaux, 480 US ___, 95 L Ed 2d 39; Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Taylor, 480 US ___, 95 L Ed 2d 55); however, State courts have concurrent jurisdiction over this claim (ERISA § 502 [e] [1]; 29 U.S.C. § 1132 [e] [1]). Special Term properly denied defendant's motion for summary judgment as plaintiff, despite his error in legal theory, has alleged facts supporting a cause of action over which it had jurisdiction (Baby Togs v. Harold Trimming Co., 67 A.D.2d 868, 869).


Summaries of

Piatko v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 10, 1987
134 A.D.2d 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)
Case details for

Piatko v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation

Case Details

Full title:JOHN W. PIATKO, Respondent, v. BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATION et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Nov 10, 1987

Citations

134 A.D.2d 954 (N.Y. App. Div. 1987)

Citing Cases

Holbrook v. National Fuel Gas Distribution

Moreover, we conclude that, in view of the broad preemptive effect of ERISA, the allegations set forth in…

Siegel, Fenchel Peddy v. Chernoff, Diamond Co.

ERISA explicitly supercedes "any and all State laws insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to any…