Legal Opinion
Hooven v. Exxon Mobil Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided October 20, 2006No. 04-3773, 05-1610PublishedCited by 97 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RENDELL, Circuit Judge.
This case arises out of a dispute over whether employees divested in connection with the merger between Mobil Corporation and Exxon Corporation are entitled to severance benefits. In preparation for the merger, Mobil implemented an Enhanced Change-in-Control Retention/Severance Plan (the “CIC Plan”).
Plaintiffs Joe A. Hooven, et al., are former Mobil Corporation employees whose employment with the merged Exxon Mobil Corporation was terminated when the division for which they worked was divested to Tosco Corporation. Plaintiffs contend that they are entitled to benefits…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Aetna Health Inc. v. DavilaSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. SchoonejongenSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- United States v. Little Lake Misere Land Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Robert L. Musto v. American General CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by97 opinions
- Fleisher v. Standard InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2012
- Pernod Ricard USA, LLC v. Bacardi U.S.A., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2011
- Pell v. EI DuPont De Nemours & Co. Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008
- In Re Unisys Corp. Retiree Medical Benefits ErisaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
- Livick v. the Gillette Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2008
92 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.