Skip to main content

Harper Excavating, Inc. v. Hansen

Certiorari Denied

Petition for certiorari denied on November 14, 2011.

Docket No.11-57

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?

Welcome to SCOTUSblog

Tell us a bit about yourself so we can tailor what you see. You can update these any time in your account.