Opinion ID: 1967327
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Violation of ERISA Disclosure Requirements

Text: Plaintiff alleged, and the trial court concluded that, by failing to provide plaintiff with summaries of the Keogh Plan, and with copies of the statements and schedules for each fiscal year of the Plan, defendant Brannen violated the provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 1024(b). [3] The trial court clearly lacked jurisdiction to decide this question, as it is precisely the type of claim relegated to the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts under 29 U.S.C. § 1132(e). 29 U.S.C. § 1132(c) sets forth the extent to which a plan administrator [4] may be liable for failure to furnish information to a participant or beneficiary as required by § 1024(b). 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(A) is the provision which grants a participant the right to bring an action for relief provided in § 1132(c). As noted above, however, § 1132(e) grants exclusive jurisdiction to federal courts of all civil actions under this title brought by ... a participant, with the exception of actions brought under § 1132(a)(1)(B). Accordingly, that part of the court's judgment relating to violations of § 1024(b), because it is based on the jurisdictional foundation of 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(A), is void for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.