Harper Excavating, Inc. v. Hansen

Issue: (1) Whether someone who would have rights or claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) “but for” the wrongful acts of that person’s former employer has standing to sue on those claims in federal court; (2) whether Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, which extends federal court jurisdiction under ERISA to “a former employee with . . . a colorable claim that he or she will prevail in a suit for benefits” implicitly endorses the “but for” basis for federal standing adopted by six of the lower circuit courts; (3) whether someone who obtains a ruling of liability for ERISA damages against his former employer accordingly has a “colorable claim” to vested benefits pursuant to the fourth prong of the Firestone test; and (4) whether standing under ERISA is determined at the time the wrongful acts complained of occurred, or instead at the time of the filing of the litigation?

Briefs and Documents

Certiorari-stage documents

• Opinion below (10th Cir.)
• Petition for certiorari
• Brief in opposition
• Petitioner's reply (forthcoming)