Legal Opinion

Lebahn v. Owens

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided February 19, 2016No. 14-3244PublishedCited by 86 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McHUGH, Circuit Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

Trent Lebahn sued Eloise Owens, a consultant for Mr. Lebahn’s employee pension plan, for negligently misrepresenting the amount of his monthly retirement benefits. The district court dismissed Mr. Lebahn’s negligent-misrepresentation claim, concluding it was preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Mr. Le-bahn then filed an untimely Rule 59 motion, arguing preemption did not apply because Ms. Owens was not a fiduciary of the pension plan. The district court construed the untimely motion as one under Rule 60(b) and denied relief, reasoning…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Koon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  2. Bowles v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Raymond J. Van Skiver Alma L. Van Skiver v. United States of America and John DoesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1992
  4. Smith v. BarrySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  5. Foote v. SpiegelCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1997

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by86 opinions

  1. Johnson v. SpencerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2020
  2. Lebahn v. National Farmers Union Uniform Pension PlanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2016
  3. Inland Concrete Enterprises, Inc. v. KraftDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2016
  4. Rowland v. MatevousianCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2024
  5. Kellogg v. Watts GuerraCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2022

81 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API