Corbett v. Noel
Decision Date | 03 December 1964 |
Parties | Donald P. CORBETT et al. v. Paul NOEL et al. |
Court | Maine Supreme Court |
Weeks, Hutchins & Frye, by Miles P. Frye, Waterville, for the plaintiff.
Bryan, Cave, McPheeters & McRoberts, by William M. Van Cleve, St. Louis, Mo., Lester T. Jolovitz, Waterville, for defendant.
Before WILLIAMSON, C. J., WEBBER, TAPLEY, SULLIVAN, SIDDALL, and MARDEN, JJ.
This case is before us on report upon an agreed statement of facts. Five former employees seek an interpretation of the provisions of the Salary Bonus Plan Trust (the 'Trust') of the Fort Halifax Packing Company to determine the extent of their vested rights and the amounts to which they are entitled under the Trust.
The amount in controversy as of July 31, 1964, was $7,492.52. The decision will determine whether this amount belongs to the five plaintiffs who ceased to be employees in 1961 and 1962, or to the fourteen defendant salaried employees with the Company on the termination of the Trust on December 31, 1963. Neither the Company nor the Trustees have any pecuniary interest in the outcome of the case.
What is the meaning of the words 'five (5) full years of continuous participation' in Article XIV, Section 1(a) of the Trust?
'The Trust was established on October 20, 1953, and the 'Anniversary Date' of the Trust is defined as:
'The twentieth day of October, in each year, including the twentieth day of October, 1953 which date is herein sometimes referred to as the first anniversary date, during which this Plan and Trust shall be in force.' (Article II, Section 1. (m)
'The terms of the Trust determining the eligibility and date of participation of qualifying employees provide as follows, in pertinent part:
'The terms of the Trust determining the vested interest of a Participant in his account upon 'termination of employment' provide as follows, in pertinent part:
'The terms of the trust provide that the portion of an account which is not vested in a Participant, in the event of 'termination of employment,' shall be allocated, as of the next valuation date, among the remaining Participants as though it were a profit to the Trust for that year.
Of the four plaintiffs who were employed prior to October 20, 1953 and became participants in the Trust on the first Anniversary Date of October 20, 1953, three terminated their employment on October 30, 1961 and one in January 1962. The fifth plaintiff was employed in February 1955, became a participant in the Trust on the Anniversary Date of October 20, 1955, and terminated his employment in January 1962.
The plaintiffs contend that the Anniversary Date on which a salaried employee becomes a participant marks the completion of one 'full year of continuous participation' within the meaning of Article XIV. The defendants' position is that a 'full year of continuous participation' means a twelve month period from Anniversary Date of the Trust to Anniversary Date in which the employee was at all times a participant in...
To continue reading
Request your trial- Brine v. State
-
Bourgoin v. Fortier
...1 In construing contracts, the Court first seeks to ascertain the intentions of the parties to the agreement. E. g., Corbett v. Noel, 160 Me. 407, 205 A.2d 165 (1964). However, these intentions may become clouded when the contractual wording is unclear and ambiguous. In such a case the cont......
-
City of Augusta v. Quirion
...Pasquale, Me., 388 A.2d 82, 85 (1978). Contract language is to be construed to implement the intent of the parties. Corbett v. Noel, 160 Me. 407, 413, 205 A.2d 165 (1964); Salmon Lake Seed Co. v. Frontier Trust Co., 130 Me. 69 (1931); see Lincoln Pulp & Paper Co., Inc. v. Dravo Corp., 436 F......