Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03436/USCOURTS-ca8-05-03436-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 791
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
Cause of Action: 

---

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

 ___________

 No. 05-3436

 ___________

Dillard’s Inc., Individually and as *

Assignee of Janet Bolton, *

*

Plaintiff/Appellee, *

*

 v. *

*

Liberty Life Assurance Company of *

Boston, a Member of the Liberty *

Mutual Group, * Appeals from the United States

* District Court for the

Defendant/Appellant. * Eastern District of Arkansas.

* 

_____________________ * [PUBLISHED]

*

*

Liberty Life Assurance Company of *

Boston, *

*

Third Party Plaintiff/ *

Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

Janet Bolton, *

*

 Third Party Defendant/ *

Appellee. *

Appellate Case: 05-3436 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/19/2006 Entry ID: 2068967
-2-

 ___________

 No. 05-3438

 ___________

Dillard’s Inc., Individually and as *

Assignee of Janet Bolton, *

*

Plaintiff/Appellant, *

*

 v. *

*

Liberty Life Assurance Company of *

Boston, a Member of the Liberty *

Mutual Group, *

*

Defendant/Appellee. *

*

_____________________ *

*

*

Liberty Life Assurance Company of *

Boston, *

*

Third Party Plaintiff, *

*

v. *

*

Janet Bolton, *

*

 Third Party Defendant. *

___________

Submitted: March 17, 2006

Filed: July 19, 2006

___________

Appellate Case: 05-3436 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/19/2006 Entry ID: 2068967
1

The Honorable James M. Rosenbaum, Chief Judge, United States District

Court for the District of Minnesota, sitting by designation.

-3-

Before WOLLMAN and RILEY, Circuit Judges, and ROSENBAUM,1

 District Judge.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Dillard’s, Inc. (Dillard’s), on behalf of itself and as assignee of Janet Bolton,

sued Liberty Life Assurance Co. of Boston (Liberty) under the Employee Retirement

Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., arguing that Liberty

abused its discretion in terminating Bolton’s long-term disability benefits. The district

court entered judgment in favor of Dillard’s and directed Liberty to pay Dillard’s for

the benefits due to Bolton under her benefits plan. Dillard’s then sought an award of

attorney’s fees and costs. The district court granted this request, but awarded a lesser

amount than Dillard’s requested. Liberty appeals from this order, arguing that the

district court erroneously awarded attorney’s fees and costs. Dillard’s cross-appeals,

arguing that the district court erred in awarding a lesser amount than requested. We

vacate the award.

In an opinion filed today, we reversed the district court’s judgment that Liberty

abused its discretion in terminating Bolton’s benefits. Dillard’s, Inc. v. Liberty Life

Assurance Co. of Boston, Nos. 05-2482/2517, slip op. (8th Cir. July 19, 2006).

Because Dillard’s is no longer the prevailing party in the underlying ERISA suit, we

vacate the district court’s award of attorney’s fees and costs. Jackson v. Metro. Life

Ins. Co., 303 F.3d 884, 890 (8th Cir. 2002) (“[B]ecause our decision eliminates [the

claimant’s] temporary status as the prevailing party, we also reverse the District

Court’s award of [his] attorney fees.”).

The order awarding fees and costs is vacated.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 05-3436 Page: 3 Date Filed: 07/19/2006 Entry ID: 2068967