Browe v. CTC Corp.
| Decision Date | 22 June 2018 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 2:15–cv–267 |
| Citation | Browe v. CTC Corp., 331 F. Supp. 3d 263 (D. Vt. 2018) |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Vermont |
| Parties | Donna BROWE, Tyler Burgess, Bonnie Jamieson, Philip Jordan, Lucille Launderville, and the Estate of Beverly Burgess, Plaintiffs, v. CTC CORPORATION and Bruce Laumeister, Defendants. |
John D. Stasny, Esq., Patrick J. Bernal, Esq., Woolmington, Campbell, Bernal & Bent, P.C., Manchester Center, VT, for Plaintiffs.
A. Jay Kenlan, Esq., Rutland, VT, for Defendants.
Christina Reiss, District JudgePlaintiffs Donna Browe, Tyler Burgess, Bonnie Jamieson, Philip Jordan, Lucille Launderville, and the Estate of Beverly Burgess (collectively, "Plaintiffs") allege that Defendants CTC Corporation ("CTC") and Bruce Laumeister (collectively, "Defendants") violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 – 1191c, by failing to adequately fund and by wrongfully denying them benefits under 1990 and 1997 deferred compensation plans (collectively, the "Plan"). They further allege that Defendants breached fiduciary duties and reporting and disclosure obligations owed to them under ERISA.
Defendants deny liability and assert that the Plan is a nonqualified "top hat" plan pursuant to which they have no further obligations. They further assert that the applicable statute of limitations bars Plaintiffs' claims. In the alternative, if they are found liable for Plaintiffs' claims, pursuant to the counterclaims they have asserted, they contend that Plaintiff Lucille Launderville should be held jointly and severally liable and indemnify them for any ERISA damages awarded against them.
From December 6–8, 2017 and March 5–6, 2018, the court conducted a bench trial. On March 26, 2018, the parties submitted supplemental briefing, at which time the court took the matter under advisement.
Patrick J. Bernal, Esq. and John D. Stasny, Esq. represent Plaintiffs. A. Jay Kenlan, Esq. represents Defendants.
Based upon the preponderance of the evidence, the court makes the following findings of fact:
Absence of Relevant Records.
The Parties.
CTC's History.
Credibility and Reliability of Mr. Laumeister's Testimony.
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Browe v. CTC Corp.
...high salaries. On the other hand, Ed Hojnowski "fixed machines, was not a ‘boss,’ and never gave any orders." Browe v. CTC Corp. (Browe I ), 331 F. Supp. 3d 263, 287 (D. Vt. 2018). Ultimately, the district court concluded that there was insufficient evidence that six of the eighteen employe......
-
Jarosz v. Am. Axle & Mfg., Inc.
...Cir. 2003) ("Terms in the Plan must be construed in accordance with the reasonable expectations of the insured."); Browe v. CTC Corp., 331 F.Supp.3d 263, 302-303 (D. Vt. 2018) (noting that ambiguities in an ERISA plan are construed against its drafter). "Language is ambiguous when it is cap......
- Cabral v. Decker
- Roman v. Decker