Legal Opinion
Bruce S. Andes, Louis S. Aronica v. Ford Motor Company
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided January 24, 1996No. 94-7252, 94-7253PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SILBERMAN, Circuit Judge:
Appellants challenge the district court’s summary judgment determining that Ford Motor Company’s decision to sell its Dealer Computer Services (DCS) subsidiary, and the resulting loss of benefits to the DCS employees, did not violate § 204(g) or § 510 of ERISA. Since no Ford benefit plan was amended as required by § 204(g) and Ford did not “discharge, fine, suspend, expel, discipline, or discriminate” against a DCS employee within the meaning of § 510, we affirm.
I
The basic facts are undisputed. Appellants represent 60 former employees of DCS, a subsidiary of Ford…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. McClendonSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Mertens v. Hewitt AssociatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Alessi v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Inter-Modal Rail Employees Ass'n v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Hartline v. Sheet Metal Workers' National Pension FundDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2000
- Mattei v. MatteiCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
- Teamsters Local Union No. 705 v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2014
- Apsley v. The Boeing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2012
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.