ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Class Action Blogs -> Class Action Defense Blog

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Class Action

: Class Action Defense Blog

Class Action Defense Cases–In re Lucent Death Benefits: Third Circuit Affirms Dismissal Of ERISA Class Action Agreeing That Pension Benefit Was Unvested And Terminable By Lucent

By Michael J. Hassen

ADVERTISEMENTS

District Court Properly Dismissed ERISA Class Action because Employer’s Termination of Pensioner Death Benefits Underlying Class Action Claims were “an Unvested Welfare Benefit” and ERISA did not Prohibit Termination of the Benefit Third Circuit Holds

Plaintiffs, former employees of AT&T and Lucent Technologies, filed a putative class action against various defendants alleging violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA); specifically, the class action complaint alleged that defendants violated ERISA in terminating a pensioner death benefit. In re Lucent Death Benefits ERISA Litig., 541 F.3d 250, 252 (3d Cir. 2008). The class action asserted “four claims under ERISA and federal common law on behalf of a putative class of pensioners” and centered on the allegation “that Lucent had terminated the pensioner death benefit unlawfully and sought declaratory and injunctive relief reversing that termination.” Id., at 253. Defense attorneys moved to dismiss the class action on the ground that the benefit underlying the putative class action was “an unvested welfare benefit” and, accordingly, “neither [ERISA], nor unilateral contract principles prohibited its termination.” Id., at 252. The district court dismissed the class action complaint, finding that “the plan documents were not ambiguous and therefore extrinsic evidence was not relevant to construing them” and holding, as argued by defense attorneys, that “the pensioner death benefit was an unvested welfare benefit and that neither ERISA nor unilateral contract principles prohibited its elimination.” Id., at 253. The Third Circuit affirmed.

As the Circuit Court’s opinion centers on the substantive law governing ERISA rather than the class action aspects of the lawsuit, we do not further discuss the case. We quote only the Circuit Court’s conclusion: “The pensioner death benefit, a lump-sum payment made in the event of a pensioner's death, was an unvested welfare benefit that Lucent could terminate without violating ERISA or unilateral contract principles. We thus affirm the decision of the District Court dismissing the pensioners' complaint….” In re Lucent Death Benefits, at 257. Interested readers may find the Third Circuit’s entire opinion here.

Full post as published by Class Action Defense Blog on October 23, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0177 secs (new cache)