Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Kramarsky

Second Circuit

Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Kramarsky

650 F.2d 1309, 31 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1787, 1981 U.S. App. LEXIS 13403, 32 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 33,843

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMay 11, 1981

DocketNo. 19, Docket 80-7185

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 650 F.2d 1309 (Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Kramarsky) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Kramarsky, 650 F.2d 1309, 31 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1787, 1981 U.S. App. LEXIS 13403, 32 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 33,843 (2d Cir. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

KEARSE, Circuit Judge:

This is one of three unconsolidated cases argued together on appeal. Also argued were Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Kramarsky, 650 F.2d 1287 (2nd Cir.) (“Delta”), and Burroughs Corporation v. Kramarsky, 650 F.2d 1308 (2nd Cir.). The plaintiff here is an employer which maintains employee benefit plans that are subject to federal regulation under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq. (1976). Plaintiff is also subject to New York’s Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 296 (McKinney 1972 & Supp. 1980-81) (“HRL”). HRL requires that disability benefit plans such as plaintiff’s provide benefits for disabilities related to pregnancy on the same basis as for other disabilities. Plaintiff’s plans exclude disabilities related to pregnancy.

Plaintiff commenced the present action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against enforcement of the HRL on the sole ground that § 514(a) of ERISA provides that ERI-SA preempts state laws such as the HRL. Relying on Pervel Industries, Inc. v. Connecticut Comm'n on Human Rights & Opportunities, 468 F.Supp. 490 (D.Conn.1978), aff’d mem., 603 F.2d 214 (2d Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1031, 100 S.Ct. 701, 62 L.Ed.2d 667 (1980), in which this Court affirmed by summary order a ruling that ERISA § 514(a) preempted a Connecticut statute similar to the HRL, the district court granted a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the HRL.

For the reasons stated in our opinion in Delta, plaintiff’s claim is untenable in light of the Supreme Court’s action in Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. v. Minnesota, 444 U.S. 1041, 100 S.Ct. 725, 62 L.Ed.2d 726 (1980). We therefore reverse, and remand to the district court for dismissal of the complaint.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

KEARSE, Circuit Judge:

This is one of three unconsolidated cases argued together on appeal. Also argued were Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Kramarsky, 650 F.2d 1287 (2nd Cir.) (“Delta”), and Burroughs Corporation v. Kramarsky, 650 F.2d 1308 (2nd Cir.). The plaintiff here is an employer which maintains employee benefit plans that are subject to federal regulation under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq. (1976). Plaintiff is also subject to New York’s Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 296 (McKinney 1972 & Supp. 1980-81) (“HRL”). HRL requires that disability benefit plans such as plaintiff’s provide benefits for disabilities related to pregnancy on the same basis as for other disabilities. Plaintiff’s plans exclude disabilities related to pregnancy.

Plaintiff commenced the present action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against enforcement of the HRL on the sole ground that § 514(a) of ERISA provides that ERI-SA preempts state laws such as the HRL. Relying on Pervel Industries, Inc. v. Connecticut Comm'n on Human Rights & Opportunities, 468 F.Supp. 490 (D.Conn.1978), aff’d mem., 603 F.2d 214 (2d Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1031, 100 S.Ct. 701, 62 L.Ed.2d 667 (1980), in which this Court affirmed by summary order a ruling that ERISA § 514(a) preempted a Connecticut statute similar to the HRL, the district court granted a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the HRL.

For the reasons stated in our opinion in Delta, plaintiff’s claim is untenable in light of the Supreme Court’s action in Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. v. Minnesota, 444 U.S. 1041, 100 S.Ct. 725, 62 L.Ed.2d 726 (1980). We therefore reverse, and remand to the district court for dismissal of the complaint.

31 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1789, 32 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 33,841 Delta Air Lines, Inc., Allegheny Airlines, Inc., National Airlines, Inc., Piedmont Aviation, Inc., Braniff Airways, Inc., North Central Airlines, Inc., Southern Airways, Inc., Eastern Air Lines, Inc., Northwest Airlines, Inc., Trans World Airlines, Inc., Ozark Air Lines, Inc., American Airlines, Inc., Pan American World Airways, Inc., and United Air Lines, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross-Appellants v. Werner H. Kramarsky, Individually and in His Capacity as Commissioner of the New York State Division of Human Rights Ann Thacher Anderson, Individually and in Her Capacity as General Counsel of the New York State Division of Human Rights the New York State Division of Human Rights, an Agency of the Executive Department of the State of New York Arthur Cooperman, Individually and in His Capacity as Chairman of the New York State Workmen's Compensation Board and the New York State Workmen's Compensation Board, Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees

666 F.2d 21 (Second Circuit, 1981)

31 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1793, 32 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 33,844 Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Werner H. Kramarsky, as Commissioner of the New York State Division of Human Rights, the New York State Division of Human Rights, and the New York State Human Rights Appeal Board

666 F.2d 26 (Second Circuit, 1981)

Burroughs Corp. v. Kramarsky

650 F.2d 1308 (Second Circuit, 1981)

25 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1193, 26 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 31,831, 2 Employee Benefits Ca 1336 Delta Air Lines, Inc., Allegheny Airlines, Inc., National Airlines, Inc., Piedmont Aviation, Inc., Braniff Airways, Inc., North Central Airlines, Inc., Southern Airways, Inc., Eastern Air Lines, Inc., Northwest Airlines, Inc., Trans World Airlines, Inc., Ozark Air Lines, Inc., American Airlines, Inc., Pan American World Airways, Inc., and United Air Lines, Inc., Plaintiffs-Appellees- Cross-Appellants v. Werner H. Kramarsky, Individually and in His Capacity as Commissioner of the New York State Division of Human Rights Ann Thacher Anderson, Individually and in Her Capacity as General Counsel of the New York State Division of Human Rights the New York State Division of Human Rights, an Agency of the Executive Department of the State of New York Arthur Cooperman, Individually and in His Capacity as Chairman of the New York State Workmen's Compensation Board and the New York State Workmen's Compensation Board, Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees

650 F.2d 1287 (Second Circuit, 1981)

31 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1786, 32 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 33,845 Burroughs Corporation v. Werner H. Kramarsky, as Commissioner of the New York State Division of Human Rights

650 F.2d 1308 (Second Circuit, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

650 F.2d 1309, 31 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1787, 1981 U.S. App. LEXIS 13403, 32 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 33,843, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/metropolitan-life-insurance-v-kramarsky-ca2-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack