Oldenburger v. Central States Southeast and Southwest Areas Teamster Pension Fund

Decision Date30 May 1991
Docket NumberNo. 90-2053,90-2053
Citation934 F.2d 171
PartiesGeorge OLDENBURGER, Appellant, v. CENTRAL STATES SOUTHEAST AND SOUTHWEST AREAS TEAMSTER PENSION FUND; Loran W. Robbins; Marion M. Winstead; Robert C. Sasone; R. Jerry Cook; Robert J. Baker; Howard McDougall; R.V. Pulliam, Sr.; Arthur H. Bune, Jr., Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

Terry W. Guinan, Fort Dodge, Iowa, for appellant.

Joan P. Simmons of Rosemont, Ill., for appellees.

Before ARNOLD and WOLLMAN, Circuit Judges, and BRIGHT, Senior Circuit Judge.

WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge.

This case presents an issue concerning the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. Sec. 1001, et seq. George Oldenburger appeals from the district court's 1 grant of summary judgment for Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund and denial of his motion for a new trial and motion to alter or amend the judgment. We agree with the district court that the decision of Central States' Trustees to deny Oldenburger's pension request was not arbitrary or capricious, and we therefore affirm.

I.

Oldenburger first applied for a pension in January 1975. Central States denied his request that year. More than ten years later, Oldenburger sought and obtained review of the denial through Central States' internal review procedure.

On his original application for a pension in 1975, Oldenburger stated that he had been a foreman for McCoy Truck Lines from 1937 until 1961; a foreman for Briggs Transportation Company from 1961 until 1969; and a foreman for Takin Brothers Freight Lines from 1969 through 1975.

Central States' records revealed that McCoy was not a contributing employer to the pension fund until 1955. Only three years of pension contributions, from March 1958 through May 1961, were submitted for Oldenburger by McCoy. In response to inquiries from Central States, Local Union 650 informed Central States that Oldenburger was a terminal manager at McCoy from 1955 until 1958 and that he was not covered by a collective bargaining agreement during that period of time.

In regard to Oldenburger's employment at Briggs, Central States contacted Local 844, the local union that would have contracted with Briggs and Takin Brothers during the years at issue. Local 844 responded that Oldenburger "made the choice of going 'company foreman' when Briggs took over McCoy Truck Lines. Some companies allowed working foremen under the [collective bargaining agreement], such as McCoy Truck Lines, but Briggs did not, therefore, no contributions were due on his behalf."

With respect to Oldenburger's employment at Takin Brothers, Central States contacted Takin, which informed Central States that Oldenburger was on a withdrawal card from the union while employed at Takin. Oldenburger's social security records indicate that he was a salaried employee at Briggs during 1961 through 1968 and while at Takin Brothers from 1969 through 1974.

Oldenburger submitted affidavits by four co-workers at McCoy and Briggs that described Oldenburger's positions as requiring the same type of work as other dock workers and truck drivers with minor supervisory authority. Other documents described Oldenburger's positions as a supervisor; part-time truck driver and part-time warehouse man; a working foreman; and a terminal manager.

Oldenburger's request for pension benefits was denied by Central States' Benefits Claim Review committee on April 9, 1987. Central States' Benefits Claim Appeals Committee, the next step in the procedure, rejected his claim on May 29, 1987. The Appeals Committee determined that contributions were not owed by Oldenburger's employers from 1955 through February 1958 and from May 1961 through 1974 because the type of work Oldenburger performed was not covered by the applicable collective bargaining agreements.

The claim was then presented to the Central States Board of Trustees at its meeting of August 13-14, 1987. The information provided to the Trustees gave varying accounts of Oldenburger's work history with his three employers. The Trustees voted to deny Oldenburger's appeal, finding that he had been employed in a supervisory capacity, was not an employee as defined in the pension plan, and did not establish any right to service credit. The district court affirmed the Trustees' decision, and this appeal followed.

II.

The standard of review to be applied to the denial of pension benefits under an ERISA plan depends upon whether the instrument establishing the plan expressly gives the fiduciary discretionary authority to determine eligibility for benefits or to construe the plan's terms. If it does, then the fiduciary's decisions are reviewed under the deferential arbitrary-and-capricious standard. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, 489 U.S. 101, 111-15, 109 S.Ct. 948, 954-57, 103 L.Ed.2d 80 (1989). Thus, our first inquiry is whether the Trustees of Central States' pension fund had discretionary power to construe uncertain terms in the benefit plan. Lakey v. Remington Arms Co., 874 F.2d 541, 544 (8th Cir.1989).

We conclude that Article IV, Section 17 of Central States' Trust Agreement gives the Board of Trustees discretionary authority to construe the terms of the trust agreement and the terms and regulations of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
31 cases
  • Torre v. Federated Mut. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Kansas
    • 31 Mayo 1994
    ... ... Civ. A. No. 91-4235-DES ... United States District Court, D. Kansas ... May 31, 1994 ... limit her expression of interest to those areas and for those jobs in which she expressed a ... points the court to no openings in the Central Region or the geographic locations in which she ... is acting for the future stability of the fund cannot be entertained. 854 F. Supp. 815 ... See Christie v. K-Mart Corp. Emp. Ret. Pension Plan, 784 F.Supp. 796, 801 (D.Kan.1992) (Judge ... 1031, 678 P.2d 169 (1984)); Southwest Nat. Bank v. Simpson and Son, 14 Kan.App.2d 763, ... 2 (8th Cir.1992) (citing to Oldenburger v. Central States S.E. & S.W. Areas Teamster Pen ... ...
  • Kracht v. Aalfs Associates HCP
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of West Virginia
    • 17 Octubre 1995
    ...Cir.1994); Kirk v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co., 942 F.2d 504, 505 (8th Cir.1991); Oldenburger v. Central States S.E. & S.W. Areas Teamster Pension Fund, 934 F.2d 171, 173 (8th Cir.1991); Brewer v. Lincoln Nat. Life Ins. Co., 921 F.2d 150, 153 (8th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 501 U.S. 12......
  • U.S. v. Elmardoudi
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Iowa
    • 12 Marzo 2008
    ... 611 F.Supp.2d 879 ... UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, ... Abdel-Ilah ... ...
  • Lickteig v. Business Men's Assur. Co. of America
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • 24 Julio 1995
    ...Central States S.E. and S.W. Areas Health & Welfare Fund, 18 F.3d 556, 558 (8th Cir.1994); Oldenburger v. Central States S.E. & S.W. Areas Teamster Pension Fund, 934 F.2d 171, 173 (8th Cir.1991). 6 Here, there is no dispute that the Central States Plan vests its trustees with discretion to ......
  • 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