Going v. Southern Mill Emp. Trust
| Decision Date | 29 March 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 36383,36383 |
| Parties | 36 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2130, 28 Lab.Cas. P 69,143, 1955 OK 85 W. G. GOING, Plaintiff in Error, v. SOUTHERN MILL EMPLOYEES' TRUST, and Roy Davis, R. E. Ahrens, and John T. Edwards, Trustees, Defendants in Error. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
An employer who creates a profit-sharing retirement plan for the benefit of his employees, which plan is a voluntary one supported solely by contributions from the employer, has the right to prescribe the terms of the plan and the manner in which it should be administered; and such terms as are prescribed are binding upon, and determinative of the rights of, an employee asserting a right to benefits thereunder.
Appeal from the Court of Common Pleas of Tulsa County; Leslie W. Lisle, Judge.
Action by W. G. Going against Southern Mill Employees' Trust and the trustees thereof to recover alleged share of the funds of such trust. From a judgment for defendants rendered upon sustaining a demurrer to plaintiff's evidence, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Van Cleave & Thomas, Harley Van Cleave and Raymond B. Thomas, and Charles C. Liebler, Tulsa, for plaintiff in error.
A. C. Saunders and R. C. Saunders, Tulsa, for defendants in error.
This action was brought by W. G. Going, hereinafter referred to as plaintiff, against Southern Mill Employees' Trust and the trustees thereof, hereinafter referred to as defendants, to compel defendants to pay to plaintiff his alleged share of the funds of such trust which he alleges accrued to him during his term of employment by Southern Mill and Manufacturing Company, creator of the trust. At the trial of the case plaintiff presented his evidence and rested, whereupon defendants demurred to the evidence and such demurrer was sustained by the court, the jury dismissed, and the judgment rendered for defendants. The only question presented by plaintiff's appeal is whether the trial court erred in sustaining defendants' demurrer to plaintiff's evidence.
In 1947 Southern Mill and Manufacturing Company established a profit sharing plan for retirement for the benefit of its employees in the form of an employees' trust. The trust is a voluntary one supported by contributions from the company's profits, and the employees make no contribution thereto. The provisions of the trust agreement specify who is eligible to participate, the conditions under which benefits will be paid to participants, a formula for determining credits to each participant's account, a formula for distribution of credits to participants, and provide for the administration of the trust by the trustees. Art. II, par. 3 of the trust agreement provides that eligible employees must make written application and consent to be Lound by the terms of the trust agreement before they shall be entitled to participate in the benefits thereof and that the determination of the trustees as to the eligibility of any beneficiary to participate in the benefits thereof shall be final and conclusive. Art. VI, par. 5, of the trust agreement provides, in so far as is material here, that no employee shall receive any of the benefits of the plan who has not completed at least five years service with the company, except that if in the exercise of their sole discretion the trustees determine that an employee should be retired for reasons of health, sickness or disability, such employee shall receive the portion of benefits which have accrued to his credit during his term of employment regardless of the period of time in such employment.
The evidence reveals that plaintiff was employed by Southern Mill and Manufacturing Co. fro...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shaw v. Atlantic Coast Life Ins. Co.
...sued employer for monthly payment due under retirement plan), aff'd, 293 N.Y. 105, 56 N.E.2d 67 (1944); Going v. Southern Mill Employees' Trust, 281 P.2d 762 (Okla.1955) (employee sued trust to compel payment of share in profit-sharing plan); Amicone v. Kennecott Copper Corp., 431 P.2d 130 ......
-
Davis v. Humble Oil & Refining Co., 9305
...approach has been emphasized where the court is considering non-contributory pension and profit sharing plans. Going v. Southern Mill Employees' Trust (Okl.) 281 P.2d 762. Other jurisdictions voice the rule that courts will not interfere unless there is a showing that the company board acte......
-
Lano v. Rochester Germicide Co.
...Thompson (8 Cir.) 140 F.2d 786. In reviewing the decisions of other jurisdictions, the Oklahoma court stated in Going v. Southern Mill Employees' Trust (Okl.) 281 P.2d 762, 763: '* * * we conclude that an employer who creates a profit sharing retirement plan for the benefit of his employees......
-
Oiler v. Dayton Reliable Tool & Mfg. Co.
...and conclusive, the decision of such trustees is binding on an employee claiming benefits under such plan.' Going v. Southern Mill Employees' Trust (Okl.1955), 281 P.2d 762, 763. 'All the cases which have been called to our attention take the position that great latitude is tolerated in the......