Legal Opinion
Cirulis v. UNUM Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided March 5, 2003No. 01-3362PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LUCERO, Circuit Judge.
This case requires resolution of the following question: Does the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., authorize a plan administrator to condition payment of severance benefits on an employee’s assent to a non-solicitation provision not included on the face of a plan? David B. Cirulis, formerly employed with UNUM Life Insurance Company (“UNUM”), brought suit to recover severance payments denied to him after he refused to sign a General Agreement and Release (“Release”) including a non-solicitation clause. This clause prohibited…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. SchoonejongenSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- LOCKHEED CORP. Et Al. v. SPINKSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Massachusetts v. MorashSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Blau v. Del Monte Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Kimber v. Thiokol CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1999
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Shirley O. Fought v. Unum Life Insurance Company of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
- Madeline D. v. Anthem Health Plans of Ky., Inc.District Court, D. Utah · 2019
- Finley v. Hewlett-Packard Co. Employee Benefits Organization Income Protection PlanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
- Terra Venture, Inc. v. JDN Real Estate-Overland Park, L.P.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2006
- Pactiv Corp. v. RupertCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2013
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.