United States Eleventh Circuit

In a matter of first impression as to whether a complaint for breach of fiduciary duty regarding the diminution of value of a defined contribution retirement plan states a claim for benefits under ERISA, dismissal of the complaint with prejudice is reversed in part, affirmed in part, and remanded where: 1) the district court erred when it treated the threshold issue as one of subject-matter jurisdiction and when it dismissed the former employees' complaint with prejudice; 2) a complaint for breach of fiduciary duty that seeks restitution of the diminished value of a defined contribution plan is for benefits, not damages; and 3) the case is remanded to determine whether to dismiss the complaint without prejudice or stay the litigation to allow former employees to pursue administrative remedies.

Appellate Information

• Decided 07/31/2008
• Published 07/31/2008

Judges

• PRYOR, Circuit Judge:, Before EDMONDSON, Chief Judge, PRYOR, Circuit Judge, and JOHNSON, District Judge.

Court

• United States Eleventh Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Jeffrey M. Norton, Harwood Feffer, LLP, New York City, Geoffrey M. Johnson, Chagrin Falls, OH, Lisa T. Millican, Greenfield Millican, P.C., Atlanta, GA, David R. Scott, Scott & Scott, Amanda F. Lawrence, Colchester, CT, Thomas J. McKenna, Gainey & McKenna, New York City, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Darren A. Shuler, David Tetrick, Jr., Joseph P. Rockers, Michael R. Smith, King & Spalding, Atlanta, GA, for Defendants-Appellees.