Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:00-CV-0385-G.
July 16, 2001.
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Before the court are the motions for summary judgment of the defendants New York Life Insurance Company ("New York Life") and Western Auto Supply company ("Western Auto"). For the reasons stated below, the motions are granted.
Background
This is an ERISA case. The plaintiff, Sarah Talley ("Talley"), is the ex-wife of the ERISA plan participant, James Jacob Mowdy ("Mowdy"). Under the terms of the decree by which Mowdy and Talley were divorced, Mowdy was to forward to Talley one-half of his monthly pension benefit as it was received. When Mowdy failed to perform this obligation over a period of several years, Talley brought this suit in a state district court against Mowdy and his present wife, New York Life, and Western Auto. Western Auto, with New York Life's consent, removed the case to this court on the ground of ERISA pre-emption. See generally Notice of Removal.
"ERISA" refers to the "Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974," 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq.
Talley obtained a default judgement against Mowdy and his present wife on October 31, 2000. New York Life and Western Auto now seek summary judgment on the claims Talley asserts against them under Texas law for breach of fiduciary duty, constructive fraud, and gross negligence.
Discussion
The court agrees with New York Life and Western Auto that ERISA pre-empts Talley's state-law claims against them and that, under ERISA, Talley has no claim against them on which relief can be granted. Even if this were not the case, however, the movants have also shown in their respective motions that Talley could not possibly establish her state law claims against them. Talley has not, in response to the motions, negated these showings.
The sad truth of this case is that Talley's failure to receive the pension benefits — to which she was entitled by her decree of divorce from Mowdy — is not attributable to New York Life or Western Auto but to Mowdy. Those two entities did all that the law obligated them to do, but Mowdy did not. Talley has already obtained relief against Mowdy, in the interlocutory default judgment of October 31, 2000, for his derelictions. She has not shown that she is entitled to additional relief against New York Life or Western Auto.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated, the motions of New York Life and Western Auto for summary judgment are GRANTED. Judgment will be entered that Talley take nothing on her claims against these defendants.
Because Talley's claims against Mowdy et ux. are the subject of a default judgment on which further proceedings will be necessary, and because those claims are not pre-empted by ERISA, that part of the case (i.e., Talley's claims against James Jacob Mowdy and Araceli S. Mowdy) is REMANDED, on the court's own motion, to the 192nd Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c), 1441(c).