Mundell v. Natsios-Mundell

OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs in the above-captioned case filed this lawsuit in New York state court in March 2024. Defendant then removed the case to federal court, and in response, plaintiffs amended their complaint and moved to remand the case back to state court. Plaintiffs’ motion to remand requires the Court to determine whether the “complete-preemption” doctrine under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) supplies federal jurisdiction in this case. Because the state-law claims alleged in plaintiffs’ complaint do not sufficiently implicate ERISA so as to be covered by its exclusive civil remedy under the two-part test outlined by the Supreme Court in Aetna Health Inc. v. Davila, 542 U.S. 200 (2004), the Court grants plaintiffs’ motion to remand. I. Background This case involves a family dispute over money. Dr. Robert Mundell was a Nobel prize-winning economist who worked, at various points in his career, at Johns Hopkins University, the University of Chicago, and Columbia University. Compl. 13. As a benefit of his employment, Dr. Mundell held retirement accounts with each institution, maintained by TIAA-CREF. Id.

22, 26, 28. Dr. Mundell had three children with his first wife; plaintiffs in this case are two of these children and two grandchildren.¹ Id.