Swaida v. IBM Retirement Plan, 568
| Decision Date | 22 February 1984 |
| Docket Number | D,No. 568,568 |
| Citation | 728 F.2d 159 |
| Parties | 5 Employee Benefits Ca 1121 Paul P. SWAIDA, Jr., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. IBM RETIREMENT PLAN, Retirement Plan Committee of the IBM Retirement Plan, Plan Administrator of the IBM Retirement Plan, Board of Directors of International Business Machines (IBM) Corporation, IBM Vice-President Responsible for Finance, and IBM Vice-President Responsible for Personnel, Defendants-Appellees. ocket 83-7792. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
David S. Preminger, Braverman & Rosen, New York City, Karen W. Ferguson, Pension Rights Center, Stephen R. Bruce, Washington, D.C., for plaintiff-appellant.
John M. Vine, Joanne B. Grossman, Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C., Richard J. Sweetnam, IBM Corp., Armonk, N.Y., for defendants-appellees.
Glenn L. Archer, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Michael L. Paup, William S. Estabrook, Michael J. Roach, Tax Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., Rudolph W. Giuliani, U.S. Atty., S.D.N.Y., New York City, for amicus curiae U.S.
Before MESKILL, KEARSE and PRATT, Circuit Judges.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Weinfeld, J., Swaida v. IBM Retirement Plan, 570 F.Supp. 482 (S.D.N.Y.1983), granting defendant's motion for summary judgment. The district court held that the elapsed time regulations promulgated by the Department of the Treasury were within its competence and in the exercise of delegated authority and that IBM, having structured its pension plan in conformity therewith, acted justifiably when it denied plaintiff's claim to a vested pension.
We affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons spelled out by Judge Weinfeld in his opinion below, Swaida v. IBM Retirement Plan, 570 F.Supp. 482 (S.D.N.Y.1983).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rose v. Long Island R.R. Pension Plan
... ... a "governmental plan" within the meaning of section 3(32) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. Sec. 1002(32), and is therefore exempt from compliance ... United States, 461 U.S. 574, 586, 103 S.Ct. 2017, 2025, 76 L.Ed.2d 157 (1983). Cf. Swaida v. IBM Retirement Plan, 570 F.Supp. 482 (S.D.N.Y.1983) (declining to apply literal meaning of "year ... ...
-
Montgomery v. Pension Ben. Guar. Corp.
... ... he is not entitled to benefits under the LTV Steel Hourly Pension Plan ("Plan"), the successor to the Pension Plan for Hourly Employees of ... Statutory Background ... The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA" or "Act"), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., ... § 1.410(a)-7(a)(1)(ii)); Swaida v. IBM Retirement Plan, 570 F.Supp. 482, 490 (S.D.N.Y.1983) (same), aff'd ... ...
-
Bruch v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
... ... states a claim for redress for the difference under Firestone's Retirement Plan for Salaried Employees ("Retirement Plan") between an early ... 533 (26 C.F.R. § 1.410(a)-7) and approved by the court in Swaida v. I.B.M. Retirement Plan, 570 F.Supp. 482, 488 (S.D.N. Y.), aff'd, 728 ... ...
-
Johnson v. Buckley
... ... W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. Restated Assoc. Stock Ownership Plan, Defendant-Appellee ... No. 02-17094 ... United States Court of ... maintaining the plan for any reason other than a quit, retirement, discharge or death, such as vacation, holiday, sickness, disability, ... See Swaida v. IBM Ret. Plan, 570 F.Supp. 482, 485 (S.D.N.Y.1983), aff'd, 728 F.2d ... ...