N.D. Ind. Notes Split Re Standing of Pension Plans under 29 U.S.C. s. 1132(d)(1) to Make an ERISA Claim
Per Construction Workers Pension Trust Fund Lake County and Vicinity v. Reeves Fence Co., Inc., Slip Copy, 2006 WL 1518969 (N.D.Ind. May 26, 2006):
Reeves first argues that the Laborers' pension fund has no standing to bring suit under ERISA. The Circuit Courts of Appeals are split “as to whether pension plans have standing under 29 U.S.C. § 1132(d)(1) to make an ERISA claim.” Via Christi Regional Medical Center, Inc. v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas, Inc., 361 F.Supp.2d 1280, 1289 (D.Kan.2005)(collecting cases). Suggesting that the Second Circuit's view is more consistent with Supreme Court precedent, Reeves encourages the court to follow that Circuit. See, e.g., Pressroom Unions-Printers League Income Security Fund v. Continental Assurance Company, 700 F.2d 889 (2nd Cir.1983). However, the Seventh Circuit repeatedly has held that multiemployer plans have standing to sue under ERISA for delinquent contributions. See Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund v. Schilli Corporation, 420 F.3d 663, 670 (7th Cir.2005); Peoria Union Stock Yards Company Retiremen t Plan v. Penn Mutual Life Insurance Company, 698 F. 2 d 320, 326 (7th Cir.1983). See also Coleman Clinic, Ltd. v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company, 698 F.Supp. 740, 744-45 (C.D.Ill.1998). Because this court follows the Seventh Circuit, Reeves' standing argument must be rejected.