Legal Opinion · Dissent
Engfer v. General Dynamics Advanced Information System, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided March 17, 2014No. A13-0872Published
1DissentSchellhas, Judge
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s conclusion that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1144(a) (2012), preempts Minn.Stat. § 268.035, subd. 29(a)(12) (2012).
The apparent purpose of section 268.035, subdivision 29(a)(12), is to allow employers to offer their laid-off employees supplemental unemployment benefits (SUB) payments that are not characterized as wages. For a SUB plan to provide payments that are not considered wages under section 268.035, subdivision 29(a)(12), the plan “must provide supplemental payments solely for the supplementing of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- MacKey v. Lanier Collection Agency & Service, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement v. Dillingham Construction, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Hewlett-Packard Co. v. DiringerDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.