We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
LEGAL UPDATE.
- Authors
Hesse, Katherine A.; Ehrens, Doris R. MacKenzie; Hesse, Murphy
- Abstract
This article features judgment rationales on actions and defenses related to the U.S. Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) as of December 2004. In Feifer v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America, the 2nd Circuit court ruled that a memorandum and program summary that was the only written document describing benefits of a plan not yet final met the definition of an employee welfare benefit plan under ERISA because it was in writing and set forth the terms of a plan, fund or program which was heretofore or to be hereafter established or maintained by an employer . . . and was established or maintained for the purpose of providing for its participants or their beneficiaries . . . disability benefits, despite disclaimers that the summary was not intended to cover all details of the plan and that the provisions of the actual plan govern. In Eide v. Grey Fox Technical Services Corp., the 8th Circuit court ruled that a severance plan that provides for the automatic payment of a one-time, lump-sum benefit determined as of the date of a single specific occurrence and that does not require an ongoing administrative scheme to meet its obligations is not an ERISA plan. Moreover, ERISA plans must be in writing and can be neither established nor amended by an oral promise.
- Subjects
UNITED States; ACTIONS &; defenses (Law); EMPLOYEE benefit laws; RETIREMENT planning; RETIREMENT income; COMPENSATION management
- Publication
Benefits Quarterly, 2004, Vol 20, Issue 4, p61
- ISSN
8756-1263
- Publication type
Article