Richard C. Pollard v. Autotote, Ltd
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
SCIRICA, Circuit Judge.
The issue in this appeal is whether a forfeiture provision in a deferred compensation management incentive plan is enforceable under Delaware law.
I
The facts developed thus far are undisputed. Appellant Richard C. Pollard worked for Autotote, Ltd. and its corporate predecessor for approximately sixteen years. Autotote designs, installs and maintains parimutuel betting machines at racetracks and other betting arenas. Pollard’s last position with Autotote was general manager of field operations for the United States, Canada and Mexico. His primary…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- West v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Sondra L. McKenna and James R. McKenna v. Ortho Pharmaceutical CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
- Roberts v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Bankers Trust Company v. Bethlehem Steel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- Kroeger v. Stop & Shop Companies, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1982
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Curtis 1000, Incorporated v. Roy H. Suess and American Business Forms, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- Fraser v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2001
- Fearnow v. Ridenour, Swenson, Cleere & Evans, P.C.Arizona Supreme Court · 2006
- Schlumberger Technology Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Jerry G. Blaker, Defendant-Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1988
- LKQ Corporation v. Robert RutledgeCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2024
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.