Wilson v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
| Decision Date | 19 May 1995 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 94-3720 and 94-3779,s. 94-3720 and 94-3779 |
| Citation | 55 F.3d 399 |
| Parties | Pens. Plan Guide P 23910Q G. Bruce WILSON; Marco L. Gilliam; William H. Jones; Robert E. McVey; Jerry Mooneyham; Edwin R. Acheson; J. Marlene Adams; Betty E. Aldridge; Barbara Alexander; Jo Ann Altschul; Virginia S. Amyx; Brenda J. Andrews; Sandra K. Anglin; Islo D. Ashmore; Jerry L. Atwood; James D. Bailey; Jimmie F. Bailey; Margaret A. Bailey; Patsy R. Bailey; Jerry F. Baker; John C. Baker; Katherine Baker; Sue A. Barber; William E. Barnes; Joan R. Barnett; James C. Barr; William R. Baum; Betty L. Bays; Rosa Beal; Louis D. Bellard; Rose Marie Bennett; James W. Benton; Dorothy E. Bergmann; Herschel W. Biggs; Lon L. Black; John S. Blackford; Peggy N. Blaksley; Jo Blanset; Joyce E. Bohnert; Elizabeth A. Bond; William Thomas Boothe; Peggy L. Bowen; Terry L. Bowles; B. Ann Bradfield; Donald E. Braun; Leo Brian; Jarold L. Brookshire; Donna L. Brown; Betty L. Browning; C.A. Browning; E. Jean Browning; Sandra Brownlow; Jack W. Burgess; William T. Burke; Martin E. Burlingame; Janice U. Burns; Louise T. Busse; William S. Butler, Jr.; Raymond C. Caldwell; Irma M. Cannas; Mona L. Caradine; Merlene Carlson; Roger Carnaghi; Joyce Carter; Harrell J. Cathey; Audrey Janet Chadwick; Jary A. Christy; Joan M. Christy; Diana M. Cisneros-Gonzalez; Clifton L. Clark; Karen Clay-Sandifer; Ted Clemmons; Evelyn Clifton; Nina A. Coleman; Hazel D. Collvins; Kelly D. Colwell; Gonzalo L. Cortinas; Loretta Cotter; Ronald C. Cotter; Phyllis Cottrell; Patrick E. Creswell; Barbara A. Crookshank; Gary M. Cross; Rojean Cull; Donna L. Cummings; Betty Daily; Lloyd A. Dalton; Jean M. Daniel; Carl I. Davis; Carroll A. Davis; Margie Davis; Zane Davis; Lavonne L. Deck; Amanda C. Deicke; Joan M. Deimeke; Harold R. Delaney; Bobby L. Dell; Donald R. Dennis; Barbara I. Desanto; Maria M. Diaz; Carl Edward Dinkins; Patsy R. Dixon; Jack E. Dobbs; Patsy J. Doolen-Drusch; Eugene W. Dooley; Phyllis A. Dooley; C.M. Dorries; Johnie J. Dowling; Patrick A. Drayton; Neysa Joan Dreesen; William R. Dunbar; James R. Duncan; |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit |
David G. Dempsey, St. Louis, MO, argued (Leonard Cervantes, on the brief), for appellants.
Christian Andre Bourgeacq, St. Louis, MO, argued for appellees.
Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Chief Circuit Judge, MURPHY, Circuit Judge, and DAVIS, * District Judge.
Appellants, former management employees of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company (SWBT) who accepted the terms of a severance incentive plan offered in 1990, filed this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. Sec. 1001 et. seq., claiming that SWBT; its parent company, SBC Communications; and its Vice President of Human Resources, Robert A. Dickemper, breached their fiduciary duties and violated ERISA's disclosure requirements by misleading and failing to inform employees in 1990 about the possibility that future severance plans would be offered. After bifurcating the issues, the district court 1 denied the motion of the former employees for partial summary judgment and granted summary judgment in favor of SWBT, SBC, Dickemper and the Southwestern Bell Corporation Management Pension Plan. 2 Appellants contend they were entitled to a determination in their favor on liability and urge a remand for consideration of their reliance and damages. We affirm. 3
In early 1990, SWBT determined that business conditions required that it reduce its management work force. In October 1990, after considering several possible approaches, SWBT decided to offer to its management employees the Management Force Adjustment Plan (MFAP), a cash-based severance incentive plan. The MFAP offered employees up to a year's salary as a cash incentive for early retirement, along with their regular pension and other benefits. The plan was announced to employees in an October 19, 1990 letter that was prepared by Dickemper and his staff. On October 26, 1990, the company distributed a "Summary of the Management Force Adjustment Plan of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company" (MFAP Summary), which was also prepared by Dickemper and his staff. The MFAP Summary contained a section of questions and answers about the plan, including a question related to future incentive programs:
Q: Isn't this just...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Xcel Energy, Sec., Der. & "Erisa" Lit.
... ... Richard Gregory Wilson, Maslon Edelman Borman & Brand, Mpls, MN, for David H Peterson, Leonard A ... 1240, 117 S.Ct. 1844, 137 L.Ed.2d 1048 (1997); Wilson v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 55 F.3d 399, 405 (8th Cir.1995); Barnes v. Lacy, 927 ... ...
-
Martinez v. Schlumberger, Ltd.
... ... Michigan Bell Telephone Co., a 1988 case from the Sixth Circuit. 60 Michigan Bell ... by insisting upon an affirmative duty on the part of an employer, Wilson v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., an Eighth Circuit case released after ... ...
-
Gabner v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
... ... Michigan Bell Tel. Co., 858 F.2d 1154, 1163 (6th Cir. 1988) ("Several courts have ... Duval, 925 F.Supp. 815, 821 (D.D.C.1996); Wilson v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 865 F.Supp. 611, 613-14 (E.D.Mo.1994), ... ...
-
Nuzum v. Ozark Automotive Distributors, Inc., 4:03-CV-40148.
... ... 317, 322-23, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986); Wilson v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 55 F.3d 399, 405 (8th Cir.1995); see also ... ...
-
MAKING EMPLOYEE HEALTH BENEFITS UNDERSTANDABLE: THE SUMMARY-PLAN-DESCRIPTION FAILURE AND HOW TO FIX IT.
...omitted) (citing Mers, 144 F.3d at 1022-24)). (171.) ERISA [section] 102(a). (172.) See, e.g., Wilson v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co., 55 F.3d 399, 407 (8th Cir. 1995) (noting that ERISA's readability requirement "appears to be an objective standard rather than requiring an inquiry into ......