United States Eighth Circuit

In an ERISA action claiming that defendant benefit plan administrator (Wal-Mart) failed adequately to evaluate the investment options included in the plan, dismissal of the complaint is reversed where: 1) the district court erred by conflating the issue of plaintiff's Article III standing with his potential personal causes of action under ERISA; and 2) the district court erred by ignoring reasonable inferences supported by the facts alleged and drawing inferences in defendants' favor, faulting plaintiff for failing to plead facts tending to contradict those inferences.

Appellate Information

• Decided 11/25/2009
• Published 11/25/2009

Judges

• MURPHY, Circuit Judge., Before MURPHY, BRIGHT, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Eighth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Derek W. Loeser, argued, Seattle, WA, Lynn Lincoln Sarko, Michael Woerner, Gretchen Freeman Cappio, Gretchen S. Obrist, Benjamin Gould, Seattle, WA; Gregory W. Aleshire, and William R. Robb, Springfield, MO, on the brief, for appellant., Robin Springberg Parry, argued, Washington, DC, on Behalf Amicus, Secretary of Labor.


• For Appellees:
  
• Paul J. Ondrasik, Jr., argued, Washington, DC, William C. Martucci, Kristen A. Page, Kansas City, MO, Morgan D. Godgson, Eric G. Serron, Washington, DC, on the brief, for appellees., Janet M. Jacobson, Robin S. Conrad, Shane B. Kawka, John M. Vine, Thomas L. Cubbage, III, Washington, DC, for Amici on Behalf of appellees.