Legal Opinion
Miller v. Dictaphone Corporation
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided November 22, 1971No. Civ. 71-75PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ALFRED T. GOODWIN, District Judge:
Cross motions for summary judgment on agreed facts require the court to construe an employee pension plan and declare the rights of the parties.
Victor G. Miller, an Oregon resident, was employed by Dictaphone Corporation, a New York corporation, from 1934 to 1969. He retired, and a dispute arose concerning the dollar amount of his pension. The amount in controversy satisfies 28 U.S.C. § 1332.
On December 13, 1966, Dictaphone announced, by letter, changes in an existing pension plan under which Miller was already enrolled. Miller did not actually read…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hunter v. SparlingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Jacoby v. Grays Harbor Chair & Mfg. Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1970
- Chinn v. China National Aviation Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1955
- Hugo Neuffer v. Bakery and Confectionery Workers International Union of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1962
- Gould v. Continental Coffee CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1969
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Raymond Hoefel v. Atlas Tack Corporation, Raymond Mahoney v. Great Northern Industries, Inc., Atlas Tack CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1978
- Marvel v. DannemannDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1980
- Gross v. University of ChicagoAppellate Court of Illinois · 1973
- Anthony v. Ryder Truck Lines, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1979
- Caola v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1975
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.