Donaldson v. Hamburg Sav. Bank, 82 CIV 706.

Citation568 F. Supp. 897
Decision Date29 June 1983
Docket NumberNo. 82 CIV 706.,82 CIV 706.
PartiesVirginia DONALDSON, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Robert Donaldson, deceased, Plaintiff, v. HAMBURG SAVINGS BANK, the Savings Banks Retirement System, Joseph Werner, Individually and as President/Chairman of the Board of Directors and Member of the Employees Benefits Committee of Hamburg Savings Bank, Roy C. Schoenhaar, Individually and as President and Member of the Employee Benefits Committee of the Hamburg Savings Bank, Robert F. Pondt, Individually and as Executive Vice President of the Hamburg Savings Bank and Paul S. LaRosa, Individually and as Assistant Vice President of Hamburg Savings Bank Retirement Plan, Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York

Fleck, Fleck & Fleck, Garden City, N.Y., for plaintiff; Wm. Donald Fleck, Garden City, N.Y., of counsel.

Cullen & Dykman, Brooklyn, N.Y., Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, New York City, for defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

McLAUGHLIN, District Judge.

By this action, brought under § 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. § 1132, plaintiff seeks a declaration that she is entitled to full disability pension benefits under the Retirement Plan of Hamburg Savings Bank ("the Plan.") She also requests an award of the difference between the pension benefits that she has been receiving and those she would be receiving under the disability provision of the Plan. Demands for damages for fraud, misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, and failure to provide pension information are also included in the complaint.

Defendants have moved for summary judgment, pursuant to Rule 56, Fed.R. Civ.P. For the reasons developed below, the motion is granted, and the case is dismissed.

FACTS

Plaintiff is the administratrix of the estate of Robert Donaldson.

Defendant Hamburg Savings Bank ("Hamburg"), organized and operating under New York law, offers its employees a Retirement and Disability Plan. That Plan is administered by defendant Savings Banks Retirement System ("SBRS"), a not-for-profit trust created under New York law for the purpose of providing retirement benefits for the employees of member savings banks.

The individual defendants are: Joseph Werner, former President and current Chairman of the Board of Directors of Hamburg; Roy C. Schoenhaar, current President of Hamburg; Paul S. LaRosa, Assistant Vice President of Hamburg; and Robert F. Pondt, Executive Vice President of Hamburg. In addition, defendants Werner and Schoenhaar are members of the Employee Benefits Committee of Hamburg, which has the responsibility of reviewing applications for retirement benefits, and LaRosa is the Administrator of Hamburg's Retirement Plan.

Plaintiff's deceased husband, Robert Donaldson, was employed by Hamburg for thirty-two years. During that time, he held various positions, including Vice President and Controller. On or about January 9, 1980, while still in Hamburg's employ, decedent was hospitalized for a heart condition.

On February 1, 1980, LaRosa visited Robert Donaldson in the hospital, and discussed various pension benefit options. LaRosa states, by affidavit, that he informed Donaldson that he was eligible to apply for Disability Retirement which would yield higher benefit payments than a Normal or Early Retirement. Donaldson responded by signing a Disability Retirement Application, which he then gave to LaRosa. Affidavit of Paul S. LaRosa, ¶¶ 5(a)-(c).

Robert Donaldson died on February 3, 1980. Plaintiff subsequently inquired about the Disability Benefits, but was informed by Pondt that decedent was not eligible. Plaintiff's request for a copy of her husband's application was denied, in writing, by LaRosa.

Plaintiff, who has been receiving benefits under the Constructive Option Provision of the Plan, responded to the denial of her request for Retirement Disability Benefits by instituting this suit.

DISCUSSION OF LAW

The Disability Retirement Plan under which plaintiff seeks to recover contains several provisions that are significant in this litigation. Section 6.5 of the Plan defines the requirements for receipt of benefits:

Disability Retirement Benefit shall only be payable to a Participant who is deemed by the Committee to be totally and permanently disabled.

Section 6.5 must be read in conjunction with Section 6.10.1, which sets forth the method of applying for benefits. Under 6.10.1, an employee seeking retirement benefits

shall on Termination of Service with the Plan Employer be retired with a Normal, Early, Vested or Disability Retirement Benefit on request either by the Participant, or the Plan Employer on the Participant's behalf, using an application form approved by the Trustees for such purposes executed in writing and filed not later than thirty (30) days prior to the commencement of the Participant's Benefit payments.

Perhaps sensing that the above section is less than a paragon of clarity, Hamburg also provides a Summary Plan Description which states, in Part XII: "Not later than 30 days before the date you wish your retirement benefit to commence, you must file a completed Application for Retirement with the Committee."

By the terms of the Plan, Termination of Service occurs on "the earlier of the date as of which the Participant quits, is discharged, retires or dies." In this case, February 3, 1980, the date of Robert Donaldson's death, was the date of Termination of Service.

Defendants, pointing to the requirements of the Plan, make two discrete arguments for the denial of Retirement Disability benefits: (1) Section 6.5 requires a Committee determination that was never made; and (2) under Section 6.10.1 of the Plan, a claimant must file for those benefits not later than thirty days before Termination of Service. The two points are related, according to defendants, because one purpose of the thirty-day requirement is to allow the Committee sufficient time to review the application. Defendants make the further point that another purpose of the thirty-day delay is to avoid the very situation presented here: death-bed elections of high-yield pension plans. Noting that plaintiff is receiving benefits under the Constructive Option Plan, defendants argue that to permit such last-minute elections would be to "undermine the actuarial assumptions on which the funding of the Plan is based." Defendants' Reply Memorandum of Law at 17, citing Bayles v. Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund, 602 F.2d 97, 100 (5th Cir.1979).

Plaintiff contends that the thirty-day requirement is not stated as a condition precedent to the receipt of benefits, and that defendants are therefore precluded from raising non-compliance with the requirement as a defense to payment. Plaintiff also appears to argue that, because the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Kascewicz v. CITIBANK, NA
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 23 November 1993
    ...1108 (E.D.N.Y.1991); Chambers v. European American Bank & Trust Co., 601 F.Supp. 630, 638-39 (E.D.N.Y.1985); Donaldson v. Hamburg Savings Bank, 568 F.Supp. 897, 900 (E.D.N.Y.1983); Pollock v. Castrovinci, 476 F.Supp. 606, 618 (S.D.N.Y. 1979), aff'd without opinion, 622 F.2d 575 (2d Other di......
  • Brown v. Retirement Committee of Briggs & Stratton Retirement Plan
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • 15 September 1986
    ...to such a provision is limited to a determination of whether the decision is arbitrary or capricious. Donaldson v. Hamburg Savings Bank, 568 F.Supp. 897, 899-90 (E.D.N.Y.1983). It is neither arbitrary nor capricious for an employer to consider the availability of work it may have that a dis......
  • Chambers v. European American Bank and Trust Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York
    • 21 January 1985
    ...have held that the absence of a showing of prejudice removes the basis for an award of damages cites omitted." Donaldson v. Hamburg Savings Bank, 568 F.Supp. 897 (E.D.N.Y.1983). While not wishing to dwell on this thirteenth claim, we fail to understand why plaintiff has sought relief in fed......
  • Pagovich v. Moskowitz
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • 13 September 1994
    ...F.Supp. 227, 233 (S.D.N.Y. 1989); Chambers v. European American Bank, 601 F.Supp. 630, 638-39 (E.D.N.Y.1985); Donaldson v. Hamburg Savings Bank, 568 F.Supp. 897, 900 (E.D.N.Y.1983). 5 I shall assume for purposes of this motion that the documents were furnished on August 27, 1993, the day th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT