Opinion ID: 2762647
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Commonwealth Claims

Text: In his complaint, Guerra asserts a cause of action for breach of employment contract and denial of retirement benefits under Articles 1044 and 1051 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code, P.R. Laws Ann. tit. 31, §§ 2994, 3015. Article 1044 states, Obligations arising from contracts have legal force between the contracting parties, and must be fulfilled in accordance with their stipulations. Article 1051 states, in pertinent part, If the person obliged to do something should not do it, it shall be ordered to be done at his expense. Guerra argues that the district court erred in dismissing these commonwealth claims as preempted by ERISA. ERISA preempts any and all State laws insofar as they may . . . relate to any employee benefit plan. 29 U.S.C. § 1144(a). [A] cause of action 'relates to' an ERISA plan when a court must evaluate or interpret the terms of the ERISA-regulated plan to determine liability under the state law cause of action . . . [as well as] where the damages must be calculated using the terms of an ERISA plan. Hampers v. W.R. Grace & Co., 202 F.3d 44, 52 (1st Cir. 2000). A law is letter does not purport to amend the Plan and operates from the uncontestedly mistaken factual premise that Guerra worked for BPNA from 1980 to 1998. -10- preempted even if the law is not specifically designed to affect such plans, or the effect is only indirect. Zipperer v. Raytheon Co., 493 F.3d 50, 53 (1st Cir. 2007) (quoting Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. McClendon, 498 U.S. 133, 139 (1990)). Where the very same conduct underlies both the state law claim and the ERISA claim, that overlap suggests that the state law claim is an alternative mechanism for obtaining ERISA plan benefits, and the state law claim is preempted. Hampers, 202 F.3d at 52. Here, Guerra's commonwealth claims are based on the same facts as his ERISA claims. Indeed, his complaint relies on the same allegations for both causes of action. Further, he specifies in the complaint that [t]he measure of damages is the difference between the benefits correctly owed to [him] and the reduced benefits offered.6 First Am. Compl. ¶ 57. This calculation, dependent on a calculation of the benefits correctly owed, demonstrates that the commonwealth claims are merely an alternative mechanism for obtaining ERISA plan benefits. The district court thus properly held that Guerra's commonwealth claims relate to the ERISA-regulated Plan and, accordingly, they are preempted. 6 Guerra also links the commonwealth claims to a claim for lost social security benefits. He argues that he retired early in reliance on appellees' representations about his pension, and that retiring early caused his social security benefits to be significantly lower than if he had worked to age sixty-five. However, Guerra forfeited this argument by failing to raise it below. -11-