Filed: Dec. 29, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 29, 2015
Summary: ORDER W. KEITH WATKINS , Chief District Judge . Plaintiffs in these consolidated ERISA cases are former employees of Allstate. Plaintiffs allege that Allstate provided employees with a company-paid retiree life insurance plan that was to provide them with life insurance at no cost after retirement. On or about July 2, 2013, Allstate notified participants that it would no longer pay the premium on the life insurance policies after December 31, 2015. Pending is Plaintiffs' motion for prelimi
Summary: ORDER W. KEITH WATKINS , Chief District Judge . Plaintiffs in these consolidated ERISA cases are former employees of Allstate. Plaintiffs allege that Allstate provided employees with a company-paid retiree life insurance plan that was to provide them with life insurance at no cost after retirement. On or about July 2, 2013, Allstate notified participants that it would no longer pay the premium on the life insurance policies after December 31, 2015. Pending is Plaintiffs' motion for prelimin..
More
ORDER
W. KEITH WATKINS, Chief District Judge.
Plaintiffs in these consolidated ERISA cases are former employees of Allstate. Plaintiffs allege that Allstate provided employees with a company-paid retiree life insurance plan that was to provide them with life insurance at no cost after retirement. On or about July 2, 2013, Allstate notified participants that it would no longer pay the premium on the life insurance policies after December 31, 2015. Pending is Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction requiring Allstate to continue the life insurance benefits after December 31, 2015. (Doc. # 74.) Also pending is the named Klaas Plaintiffs' motion to join in the motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. # 82) and Allstate's motion to strike the motion for preliminary injunction as to unnamed members of the putative classes in these cases. Upon consideration of the motion for preliminary injunction, the parties' briefs and evidentiary submissions, and the argument of counsel and testimony presented at a hearing held on December 17, 2015, the court finds that the named Plaintiffs convincingly have demonstrated the elements of a preliminary injunction. See Winter v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, 555 U.S. 7, 24 (2008) (setting forth the four elements of a preliminary injunction).
First, Plaintiffs have demonstrated through credible evidence a substantial likelihood that they will prevail on their ERISA1 claim alleging breach of a fiduciary duty2 to disclose the terms of the plan and that their claims are timely under ERISA. Second, Plaintiffs have shown that they are likely to suffer irreparable injury unless the injunction is issued. Third, the balance of the equities weighs strongly in Plaintiffs' favor, not Defendant's. Fourth, an injunction is in the public interest.
Further, because class certification has not been granted, and because Plaintiffs did not present evidence to support the motion for preliminary injunction on behalf of putative class plaintiffs, the injunction will issue only as to the named Plaintiffs in the Klaas and Turner actions.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. # 74) is GRANTED and that Defendant Allstate, and all persons acting for its benefit or on its behalf, are ENJOINED from discontinuing or cancelling life insurance policies for the named Plaintiffs after December 31, 2015, or otherwise interfering with the existence or enforceability of said policies.
It is further ORDERED that on or before midnight, December 31, 2015, Plaintiffs shall execute individually and file signature bonds in the amount of $5,000 each. The injunction will dissolve by operation of law as to any Plaintiff not filing a bond by midnight, December 31, 2015. Because the offices of the Court are closed December 31, 2015 and January 1, 2016, counsel for Plaintiffs shall email or fax to counsel for Defendant a copy of the respective bonds and the injunction shall be effective as to the bonded Plaintiffs.
Further, it is ORDERED
1. that Allstate's motion to strike the motion for preliminary injunction as to unnamed putative class plaintiffs (Doc. # 89) is GRANTED and
2. that the Klaas Plaintiffs' motion to join in the motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. # 82) is GRANTED.
CIVIL APPEALS JURISDICTION CHECKLIST
1. Appealable Orders: Courts of Appeals have jurisdiction conferred and strictly limited by statute:
(a) Appeals from final orders pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291: Only final orders and judgments of district courts, or final orders of bankruptcy courts which have been appealed to and fully resolved by a district court under 28 U.S.C.§ 158, generally are appealable. A final decision is one that "ends the litigation on the merits and leaves nothing for the court to do but execute the judgment." Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Mestre, 701 F.2d 1365, 1368 (11th Cir. 1983). A magistrate judge's report and recommendation is not final and appealable until judgment thereon is entered by a district court judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).
(b) In cases involving multiple parties or multiple claims, a judgment as to fewer than all parties or all claims is not a final, appealable decision unless the district court has certified the judgment for immediate review under Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b). Williams v. Bishop, 732 F.2d 885, 885-86 (11th Cir. 1984). A judg ment which resolves all issues except matters, such as attorneys' fees and costs, that are collateral to the merits, is immediately appealable. Budinich v. Becton Dickinson & Co., 486 U.S. 196, 201, 108 S.Ct. 1717, 1721-22, 100 L.Ed.2d 178 (1988); LaChance v. Duffy's Draft House, Inc., 146 F.3d 832, 837 (11th Cir. 1998).
(c) Appeals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a): Appeals are permitted from orders "granting, continuing, modifying, refusing or dissolving injunctions or refusing to dissolve or modify injunctions . . ." and from "[i]nterlocutory decrees . . . determining the rights and liabilities of parties to admiralty cases in which appeals from final decrees are allowed." Interlocutory appeals from orders denying temporary restraining orders are not permitted.
(d) Appeals pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) and Fed.R.App.P. 5: The certification specified in 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b) must be obtained before a petition for permission to appeal is filed in the Court of Appeals. The district court's denial of a motion for certification is not itself appealable.
(e) Appeals pursuant to judicially created exceptions to the finality rule: Limited exceptions are discussed in cases including, but not limited to: Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 546, 69S.Ct. 1221, 1225-26, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949); Atlantic Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Blythe Eastman Paine Webber, Inc., 890 F.2d 371, 376 (11th Cir. 1989); Gillespie v. United States Steel Corp., 379 U.S. 148, 157, 85 S.Ct. 308, 312, 13 L.Ed.2d 199 (1964).
2. Time for Filing: The timely filing of a notice of appeal is mandatory and jurisdictional. Rinaldo v. Corbett, 256 F.3d 1276, 1278 (11th Cir. 2001). In civil cases, Fed.R.App.P. 4(a) and (c) set the following time limits:
(a) Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(1): A notice of appeal in compliance with the requirements set forth in Fed.R.App.P. 3 must be filed in the district court within 30 days after the entry of the order or judgment appealed from. However, if the United States or an officer or agency thereof is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed in the district court within 60 days after such entry. THE NOTICE MUST BE RECEIVED AND FILED IN THE DISTRICT COURT NO LATER THAN THE LAST DAY OF THE APPEAL PERIOD — no additional days are provided for mailing. Special filing provisions for inmates are discussed below.
(b) Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(3): "If one party timely files a notice of appeal, any other party may file a notice of appeal within 14 days after the date when the first notice was filed, or within the time otherwise prescribed by this Rule 4(a), whichever period ends later."
(c) Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(4): If any party makes a timely motion in the district court under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure of a type specified in this rule, the time for appeal for all parties runs from the date of entry of the order disposing of the last such timely filed motion.
(d) Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(5) and 4(a)(6): Under certain limited circumstances, the district court may extend the time to file a notice of appeal. Under Rule 4(a)(5), the time may be extended if a motion for an extension is filed within 30 days after expiration of the time otherwise provided to file a notice of appeal, upon a showing of excusable neglect or good cause. Under Rule 4(a)(6), the time may be extended if the district court finds upon motion that a party did not timely receive notice of the entry of the judgment or order, and that no party would be prejudiced by an extension.
(e) Fed.R.App.P. 4(c): If an inmate confined to an institution files a notice of appeal in either a civil case or a criminal case, the notice of appeal is timely if it is deposited in the institution's internal mail system on or before the last day for filing. Timely filing may be shown by a declaration in compliance with 28 U.S.C. § 1746 or a notarized statement, either of which must set forth the date of deposit and state that first-class postage has been prepaid.
3. Format of the notice of appeal: Form 1, Appendix of Forms to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, is a suitable format. See also Fed.R.App.P. 3(c). A pro se notice of appeal must be signed by the appellant.
4. Effect of a notice of appeal: A district court loses jurisdiction (authority) to act after the filing of a timely notice of appeal, except for actions in aid of appellate jurisdiction or to rule on a timely motion of the type specified in Fed.R.App.P. 4(a)(4).
