Harrold v. Coble, C-214-G-65.
Decision Date | 05 December 1966 |
Docket Number | No. C-214-G-65.,C-214-G-65. |
Citation | 261 F. Supp. 29 |
Court | U.S. District Court — Middle District of North Carolina |
Parties | Wayne H. HARROLD, Plaintiff, v. H. L. COBLE, J. F. Kirkpatrick, Leon G. Coble, Stuart Honaker, Kay Aylchick, individually and as Administrators of the "Profit Sharing Plan And Trust Agreement Of H. L. Coble Construction Company and Coble Contracting And Engineering Company," Defendants. |
Lawrence Egerton, Jr., and W. Douglas Albright, Greensboro, N. C., for plaintiff.
G. Neil Daniels and C. T. Leonard, Jr., Greensboro, N. C., for defendants.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This is an action under the Welfare and Pension Plan Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 301-309, to recover the statutory penalty provided for in 29 U.S.C. § 308(b), by reason of the alleged failure of the defendants to disclose to the plaintiff, a participant or beneficiary, a description of the defendants' pension and profit-sharing plan.
The case was tried to the court without a jury. After considering the evidence offered by the parties, including stipulations and exhibits, and the briefs and oral arguments of counsel, the Court makes and files herein its Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, separately stated:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The plaintiff, Wayne H. Harrold, is a citizen and resident of Guilford County, North Carolina.
2. The defendant, H. L. Coble, was at the time of the commencement of this action, a citizen and resident of Broward County, Florida. The defendants J. F. Kirkpatrick, Leon G. Coble, Kay Aylchick and Stuart Honaker are citizens and residents of Guilford County, North Carolina.
3. H. L. Coble is chairman of the board of H. L. Coble Construction Company; J. F. Kirkpatrick is president of H. L. Coble Construction Company; Leon G. Coble is vice president of H. L. Coble Construction Company; and Kay Aylchick is a payroll clerk employed by H. L Coble Construction Company. Stuart Honaker is an independent tax consultant with offices in the H. L. Coble Office Building, and frequently does work for H. L. Coble Construction Company. The individual defendants collectively comprise the administration committee of the pension and profit-sharing plan of H. L. Coble Construction Company and were appointed to such committee by the Board of Directors of H. L. Coble Construction Company.
4. The profit-sharing plan of H. L. Coble Construction Company was established in January of 1952, when a profit-sharing plan and trust agreement was entered into between H. L. Coble Construction Company and Guilford National Bank of Greensboro, as trustee. Guilford National Bank was subsequently merged into Security National Bank, and the North Carolina National Bank, the successor to the merged banking institutions, is now the trustee of the amended profit-sharing plan and trust agreement of H. L. Coble Construction Company.
5. The purpose of the profit-sharing plan of H. L. Coble Construction Company is to provide retirement security for employees of the company, and the plan is financed entirely by the company.
6. The profit-sharing plan and trust agreement provides for the appointment by the Board of Directors of H. L. Coble Construction Company of a "Profit-Sharing Administration Committee," to serve without compensation at the pleasure of the Board. The committee is responsible for the general administration of the plan, and is charged with the responsibility of communicating the principal provisions of the plan to the employees of the company. The composition of the committee has been changed frequently since the inception of the plan in 1952.
7. The H. L. Coble Construction Company reserves the right, at any time and from time to time, to amend the plan and trust agreement in any manner it determines desirable, or to terminate the plan and trust agreement completely.
8. The defendant Honaker was first appointed to the Profit-Sharing Administration Committee by the Board of Directors of H. L. Coble Construction Company during the latter part of 1964, but was not advised of said appointment until sometime during the early part of 1965. He was chosen by the committee as its chairman at a meeting held on May 4, 1965, and has acted in such capacity since that date.
9. The plaintiff was employed by H. L. Coble Construction Company on April 1, 1959, as an assistant to one of the executives of the company at its main office in Greensboro, North Carolina. He later took over the purchasing duties of the company and continued in that capacity until sometime in 1963. In the latter part of 1964, plaintiff was named vice president and director of H. L. Coble Construction Company, and placed in charge of its Greensboro office. He continued in that capacity until he resigned from the company on April 30, 1965.
10. During the time plaintiff was in charge of the Greensboro office of H. L. Coble Construction Company, copies of the profit-sharing plan and trust agreement were available in the main office of the company at Greensboro, North Carolina.
11. Prior to the termination of plaintiff's employment with H. L. Coble Construction Company, he discussed the provisions of the company's profit-sharing plan with the defendant Honaker. During this conference, plaintiff and Mr. Honaker went over a copy of the plan together, and Mr. Honaker furnished all information requested by the plaintiff.
12. On June 17, 1965, Mr. Honaker, as chairman of the Administration Committee, mailed to the plaintiff the following letter:
13. On June 16, 1965, the plaintiff dispatched the following letter to the Administrator of the profit-sharing...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hales v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc.
...such as Winn-Dixie possesses under the Program. Cf. Wirtz v. Gulf Oil Corp., 239 F.Supp. 483, 486 (E.D.Pa.1965). 6 Harrold v. Coble, 261 F.Supp. 29, 38 (M.D.N.C.1966), aff'd, 380 F.2d 18 (4th Cir. 1967), is not to the In that case, an action was brought under 29 U.S.C. 308(b) against the me......
-
Redman v. Warrener
...court have looked at the presence or absence of abuses Congress sought to guard against and of injury to plaintiff. See Harrold v. Coble, 261 F.Supp. 29 (M.D.N.C.1966), aff'd, 380 F.2d 18 (4th Cir. 1967); Phillips v. Unity Welfare Assoc., Inc., 359 F.Supp. 1147 (E.D.Mo.1973).2 Both parties,......
-
Doherty v. Sylvania Pension Plan for Hourly Employees, Civ. A. No. 69-1057.
...her obtaining the appropriate reports was caused by the nature of the correspondence which emanated from plaintiff. Cf. Harrold v. Coble, 261 F. Supp. 29 (M.D.N.C., 1966), aff'd. 380 F.2d 18 (4 Cir., Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied. Defendant's motion for summ......