Legal Opinion
Flick v. Borg-Warner Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided December 19, 1989No. 89-5323PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OP THE COURT
WEIS, Circuit Judge.
The district court ruled that the terms of a revised severance plan did not grant plaintiff employees benefits on the termination of their services. On appeal, plaintiffs for the first time assert that defendant could not revise its original plan because it had failed to prove the existence of a provision permitting amendments. Because plaintiffs did not raise this issue in the district court, we decline to consider it here. On those issues properly presented to us, we affirm the summary judgments for defendant.
Plaintiffs are former employees of the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Singleton v. WulffSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Fort Halifax Packing Co. v. CoyneSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Pane v. RCA Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
- Continental Group, Inc. v. HoltSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- United States v. Kikumura, YuCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- Hozier v. Midwest Fasteners, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- Harris v. City of PhiladelphiaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Yu KikumuraCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1991
- Marx v. Loral Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.