Document: 481 U.S. 58 107 S.Ct. 1542 95 L.Ed.2d 55 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner,v.Arthur TAYLOR. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. Arthur Nos. 85-686, 85-688. Argued Jan. 21, 1987. Decided April 6, Syllabus Section 502(a)(1)(B) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act 1974 (ERISA) provides that a participant or beneficiary may bring civil action to, inter alia, recover benefits due him under terms an employee benefit plan. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a), any brought in state court which federal district courts have original jurisdiction be removed by defendant to appropriate court. Petitioner insurer underwrites ERISA-covered plan set up petitioner employer pay salaried employees disabled sickness accident. After petitioners' doctors found respondent was fit resume working, his were discontinued, supplemental claim for denied, and employment terminated when he refused return work. He then filed suit reimplementation related common law contract tort claims, but petitioners alleging question over disability virtue ERISA pendent remaining claims. The District Court case properly removable granted summary judgment on merits. However, Appeals reversed ground lacked removal jurisdiction, finding complaint purported only causes action, "well-pleaded complaint" rule, cause "arises under" jurisdictional purposes plaintiff's well-pleaded raises issues, did not allow predicated basis claims subject defense pre-emption. also held doctrine Avco Corp. Machinists, 390 557, 88 1235, 20 126, permits cases purporting labor pre-empted 301 Labor Management Relations Act, 1947 (LMRA), apply this case. Held: 1. Pilot Life Ins. Co. Dedeaux, 41, 1549, 39, respondent's are ERISA, lawsuit falls directly 502(a)(1)(B), exclusive resolution suits beneficiaries from covered Pp. 62—63. 2. Common come within scope 1441(b). applies situation recharacterize displaced as arising law, even though pre-emption does appear face complaint, is normally required rule. That Congress meant so completely pre-empt area necessarily character established language 502's subsection (f), closely parallels LMRA, statements ERISA's enforcement provisions' legislative history, indicate should regarded "arising same manner suits. Respondent's contention improper because it "obvious" both persuasive, since touchstone courts' "obviousness" intent Congress. 63-67. 763 F.2d 216 (CA6 1985), reversed. O'CONNOR, J., delivered opinion unanimous Court. BRENNAN, concurring opinion, MARSHALL, joined, post, p. ----. David M. Davis, Detroit, Mich., petitioner. Peter Edward Scheer, Washington, D.C., respondent. Justice O'CONNOR 1 In 39 (1987), asserting processing regulated (ERISA), Stat. 829, 29 1001 et seq., Act. 1144(a). presented litigation whether these provision, 1132(a)(1)(B),1 extent complaints plead such 2 * General Motors Corporation, Delaware corporation whose principal place business Michigan, has provisions its employees. pays accident insured Metropolitan Insurance Company (Metropolitan). 3 employed Michigan resident Taylor 1959-1980. 1961 involved job-related automobile sustained back injury. workers' compensation injury, eventually returned May 1980, while embroiled divorce child custody dispute, took leave absence work account severe emotional problems. began paying Motors' plan, asked submit psychiatric examination designated psychiatrist. psychiatrist determined emotionally unable Six weeks later, after followup examination, however, Metropolitan's now work; stopped making payments July 30, 1980. 4 Meanwhile, had injuries continuing again sent examined, time orthopedist. physician no orthopedic problems subsequently denied claim. On October 31, requested report medical department examination. November 5 concluded disabled. When nevertheless work, notified been terminated. months later against praying "compensatory damages money contractually owed Plaintiff, mental anguish caused breach contract, well immediate all insurance coverages Plaintiff entitled to," App. Pet. Cert. No. 85-688, pp. 28a-29a. asserted wrongful termination wrongfully failing promote retaliation worker's Id., at 25a-26a. 30a. 588 F.Supp. 562 (ED Mich.1984). 6 jurisdiction. 1985). Noting split authority among courts,2 Taylor's stated pre-emption, rule Louisville & Nashville R. Mottley, 211 149, 42, 53 L.Ed. 126 (1908), precluded defense. F.2d, 219. further permitting 61 156, 185, 220. We certiorari, 475 1009, 106 1182, 89 299 (1986), reverse. II 7 our decision ERISA. This "relate[s] [an] plan." 514(a), It based upon general application regulating insurance. See 48-51, ---- - Accordingly, 514(a) saved 514(b)(2)(A). 48, Moreover, disputes. 56, III 8 century-old framework governing into described BRENNAN's Franchise Tax Board Cal. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust Southern Cal., 463 1, 103 2841, 77 420 (1983). By statute "any State United States defendants, division embracing where pending." 1441(a). One category "federal question" cases; is, those Constitution, laws, treaties States." 1331. long settled arises issues law. Gully First National Bank, 109, 57 96, 81 70 (1936); supra. rule" basic principle marking boundaries courts. supra, U.S., 9-12, S.Ct., 2846-48. 9 Federal ordinarily suit. As defense, and, therefore, authorize corollary developed particular raising select group character. For years, singled out LMRA special treatment. (1968). 10 "The necessary [in ] preemptive force powerful displace entirely 'for violation contracts between organization.' Any purely creature notwithstanding fact would provide 301." 23, 2853 (footnote omitted). 11 There dispute although raise action. therefore resolves itself can extended statutes other than order Board, without more, convert 25-27, 2854-56. suggested, came "within 502(a) ERISA" might fall 24-25, 2854-55. case, unlike tax collection we must specifically reserved Board. 12 explicit direction Congress, close one. made clear today 54, 1556, "[t]he policy choices reflected inclusion certain remedies exclusion others scheme undermined if ERISA-plan participants free obtain rejected ERISA." Cf. 25-26, 2854-55 ("Unlike rights issue Avco, State's right enforce levies central concern statute"). Even with provision lies heart unique pre-emptive id., 24, n. 26, 2854, reluctant find extraordinary power, respect converts ordinary one stating But LMRA. 502(f) says: 13 shall amount controversy citizenship parties, grant relief provided (a) section action." 1132(f). 14 301(a) 185(a). presumption similar two meaning fully confirmed history provisions. Conference Report describing 15 "[W]ith do involve title I provisions, they competent All actions laws fashion Labor-Management 1947." H.R.Conf.Rep. 93-1280, 327 (1974) (emphasis added). 16 No more specific reference expected rest consistently sets intention make questions like 54-55, 1557. example, Senator Williams, sponsor emphasized enable contrary "[i]t intended will States, Act." 120 Cong.Rec. 29933 (1974). 29942 (remarks Sen. Javits) (federal substantive "deal involving obligations private welfare pension plans"). 17 argues strenuously cannot 1144(a), 502(a). Brief Respondent 14-21. court's Indeed, noted, not, most cases, create clearly manifested Since 502(a), honor obvious filed. 18 suit, purports It, "arise[s] . States," 1331, 19 Reversed. whom MARSHALL joins, concurring. 21 write separately note today's holding narrow rejects position, urged respondent, exists states "obviously" law—that obviously construed ambiguous instead focuses "intent Congress," ante, 66, became effective Consequently, standard removal,* 22 While join Court's interpreted adopting broad premised congressional sufficient establish holds when, here, "Congress court." Ibid. future statutes, prudent course remand provides: "A brought— "(1) beneficiary— "(B) clarify Compare Clorox Court, 779 517, 521 (CA9 1985); Roe American Co., 712 450, 452 (CA10 1983); Leonardis Local 282 Pension Fund, 391 554, 556-557 (EDNY 1975); Tolson Committee Briggs Stratton Plan, 566 1503, 1504 Wis.1983) (all jurisdiction), Corp., 216, 219-220 Powers South Central Food Commercial Workers Unions, 719 760, 763-767 (CA5 1983) (no jurisdiction). understated words prior repeats today, " 'perhaps model drafting,' 46, 1552, quoting Massachusetts, 471 724, 739, 105 2380, 2389, 85 728 (1985). before Life, answer sort here obvious.

Category: 9