Lucian Johnson maintained through his employment with General Motors. 2 . Cronenwett and Gross have set forth other stipulated facts that are not relevant to the insurance beneficiary issue raised by Met Life in its interpleader action. 3 . As a result of Lucian Johnson's life insurance policy being maintained as part of an ERISA plan, the Court has federal-question jurisdiction over the present interpleader action. See Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund v. Howell, 227 F.3d 672, 674 n. 2 (6th Cir.2000) (recognizing that "the federal courts have jurisdiction over an action for interpleader to determine the proper beneficiary of benefits payable from an ERISA employee welfare plan”); see also Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Marsh, 119 F.3d 415, 418 (6th Cir.1997) (<HOLDING>). 4 . As noted above, the record also contains
holding that an insurance company assignee of a fiduciary of an erisa trust has standing to sue under 29 usc  1132a2 holding that because an erisa plan is not a participant beneficiary or fiduciary subject matter jurisdiction did not exist under  502e of erisa over a suit brought by such a plan holding that an interpleader action brought by an insurance company to determine the proper beneficiary under an erisa plan arises under 29 usc  1132a3bii and therefore presents a federal question holding that a hospital could not be an erisa beneficiary holding that suit by a beneficiary to recover benefits from a covered plan  falls directly under  502a1b of erisa and therefore was necessarily federal in character and subject to removal to federal court