Case Law James v. Int'l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension Plan

James v. Int'l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension Plan

Document Cited Authorities (33) Cited in (9) Related

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Neil David Intrater, Intrater Law Office, Silver Spring, MD, for Plaintiff.

Kent G. Cprek, Judith A. Sznyter, Jennings Sigmond, P.C., Philadelphia, PA, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

REGGIE B. WALTON, District Judge.

Plaintiff Ian Phillip James brings this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001–1461 (2006) (the ERISA), alleging that the defendants wrongfully denied him pension benefits, did not provide an adequate explanation for their decision to deny him these benefits, and failed to produce certain pension plan documents. See Third Amended Compl. (“3d Am. Compl.”) ¶¶ 22–46. Currently before the Court are the parties' renewed cross-motions for summary judgment. Upon careful consideration of the parties' motions and the entire record in this case,1 the Court concludes for the following reasons that the defendants' motion must be granted in part and denied in part, and that the plaintiff's motion must be denied.

I. BACKGROUND
A. Facts

The following facts are not in dispute and are taken in part from a memorandum opinion previously issued in this case. See James v. Int'l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension Plan, 710 F.Supp.2d 16, 18–21 (D.D.C.2010). The plaintiff was a member of the Glaziers Local Union 963 (the “Union”) starting from at least August 1, 1962. Id. at 18. During his membership with the Union, the plaintiff worked for various employers who contributed to the Glaziers Local 963 Pension Plan (the “Local 963 Plan” or “Plan”). Id. The Local 963 Plan was, from its inception, a trust fund administered by a joint labor-management board of trustees as defined under 29 U.S.C. § 186(c)(5). Id. Effective January 1, 1998, the Local 963 Plan merged with the International Painters and Allied Trades Industry Pension Plan (the Merged Plan). Id. The Merged Plan preserved all benefits that had vested under the Local 963 Plan. Id.

This case concerns two versions of the Local 963 Plan: one adopted in 1971 and another in 1993. Both versions of the Local 963 Plan contain the following pertinent components. To claim a vested interest in a pension, an employee must have accrued ten years of service credit. 1971 Plan § 3.1; 1993 Plan § 3.1.2 Employees who incurred “breaks in service” prior to vesting lost all accrued service credit. See 1971 Plan § 2.3 (“An employee will incur a loss of credited service when he fails to work at least 160 hours in any one of two (2) consecutive calendar years.”); 1993 Plan § 4.3 (“If an Employee has five consecutive Breaks in Service before he has earned Vested status, and if the number of consecutive Breaks in Service equals or exceeds his number of years of Vesting, he has a Permanent Break in Service. A Permanent Break in Service has the effect of canceling the Employee's participation, his previously credited Vesting Service, and his previous Benefit Service.”). Service credits are divided into either past service credit, which is credit awarded for employment with a contributing employer prior to October 1, 1965, or future service credit, which is credit awarded for employment with a contributing employer after October 1, 1965. 1971 Plan §§ 2.1–2.2; 1993 Plan § 4.1.

The plaintiff, believing that he had accumulated “14.54 years of covered employment,” which would qualify him as “a vested member of the Glaziers Local 963 union,” submitted an application for retirement benefits to the defendants in February 2005.3d Am. Compl. ¶¶ 5, 7. The defendants denied the plaintiff's application on March 29, 2005, claiming that the records provided to the Merged Plan by the Local 963 Plan at the time of the merger did not list the plaintiff as a vested participant. James, 710 F.Supp.2d at 19. The plaintiff then administratively appealed the defendants' denial of benefits.Id. On August 23, 2005, the defendants denied the plaintiff's administrative appeal for the same reasons stated in their initial decision, but provided for further review of the plaintiff's application upon receipt of a Social Security Administration (“SSA”) earnings report for the plaintiff. Defs.' Mot., Ex. 25 (August 23, 2005 Letter from Gary J. Meyers to Ian P. James) at 1. The defendants thereafter received the plaintiff's SSA earnings report, but were unable to determine from that record whether the plaintiff had any additional work in covered employment under the Local 963 Plan that qualified him as a vested Plan participant. Id., Ex. 32 (March 29, 2007 Letter from Gary Myers to Neil Intrater) at 1.

However, during their review of the plaintiff's claims, the defendants discovered a Local 963 Plan record from 1973 which indicated that the plaintiff had “accumulated 3.3 years of past service credit before October 1, 1965, and 6.2 years of future service credit,” for a total of 9.5 service credits. Defs.' Renew. Mem. at 3; see Pl.'s Mot., Ex. 13 (Annual Pension List Fund for Year Ending 12/31/1973 (1973 Pension Record”)). Based on this newly discovered record, the defendants issued a revised determination on June 27, 2007, awarding the plaintiff $409.68 in monthly pension benefits.3d Am. Compl. ¶ 13. At the plaintiff's request, the defendants subsequently issued the following “breakdown” of their calculation of the $409.68 award:

+---------------------------------------------------------+
¦Years of Service                  ¦Benefit Level ¦Benefit¦
+----------------------------------+--------------+-------¦
¦3.3 years of Past Service Credit  ¦$1.50         ¦$ 54.00¦
+----------------------------------+--------------+-------¦
¦6.2 years of Future Service Credit¦$4.94         ¦$355.68¦
+----------------------------------+--------------+-------¦
¦Total Monthly Benefit             ¦              ¦$409.68¦
+---------------------------------------------------------+

Defs.' Mot., Ex. 38 (August 16, 2007 Letter from Gary Meyers to Neil Intrater) at 1.3

After receiving the defendants' clarification letter, the plaintiff administratively appealed the defendants' June 27, 2007 $409.68 monthly pension award. Defs.' Mot., Ex. 39 (August 20, 2007 Letter from Neil Intrater to the International Painters and Allied Traders (“IPAT”) Board of Trustees) at 1. Specifically, the plaintiff appealed the “amount of the award,” claiming that it was improperly “calculated based upon 9.5 credits,” rather than the “14.54 credits” to which he claimed entitlement. Id. In support of his claim that he was entitled to 14.54 service credits, the plaintiff asserted that the defendants failed to credit him for service in covered employment from 1959 to 1972 and 1979 to 1980. Defs.' Mot., Ex. 4 (March 3, 2008 Letter from Gary Meyers to Neil Intrater) at 2.

The defendants denied the plaintiff's administrative appeal by letter dated March 3, 2008. Id. at 2–4. In rejecting the plaintiff's appeal, the defendants again highlighted the 1973 Pension Record that listed the plaintiff as having only 9.5 service credits, noting that the plaintiff failed to produce “any reliable evidence of additional service beyond” what was stated in this record. Id. at 2. Regarding the plaintiff's claimed service between 1959 and 1962, the defendants found that while the plaintiff's SSA earnings report “show[ed] work before 1962 with Local 963 employers, it [did] not show that this work was under a Local 963 Collective Bargaining Agreement,” and that it was “unlikely that the [plaintiff] worked continuously in the Local 963 bargaining unit in Maryland from 1959 to 1962 without union membership.” Id. at 3. They deemed the plaintiffs' “belated and self-serving claim ... about the nature of his work ... insufficient to overcome the contemporaneous records.” Id. With respect to the claimed service credits in 1965, the defendants explained that Section 4.1(a) of the [1993 Plan] gives past service credit for any plan year that began before [October 1, 1965],” where the employee “work[ed] under a Local 963 Collective Bargaining Agreement.” Id. at 2. Because the term “plan year” was not defined in the 1993 Plan, the defendants inferred from the 1973 Pension Record that the term designated a “calendar year.” Id. The defendants did not provide a detailed breakdown of how it concluded that the plaintiff was entitled to 3.3 years of past service credit, but they did state that credits earned in “early 1965 were “drop[ped] from the calculation, and the plaintiff instead received “part[-]year credit” in 1965 for work performed “from October 1, 1965 to December 31, 1965.” Id. Regarding service credit for 1966 to 1969, the defendants estimated the credit to which the plaintiff was entitled “by [computing] the ratio of earnings for years 1967, 1968, and 1969 from contributing employers to the high earnings from contributing employers on the [plaintiff's Social Security] report in 1966.” Id. at 3. The defendants claimed that this calculation, when considered along with the 1973 Pension Record, confirmed that the plaintiff was only entitled to 6.2 future service credits for the time period between 1966 and 1973. Id. As for the disputed service credits in 1979 and 1980, the defendants found “no record of contributory work in this period beyond union membership from December 5, 1979 to April 2, 1980.” Id.

While the plaintiff continued to dispute the defendants' attribution to him of only 9.5 years of service, he ultimately decided that “due to the lack of documentation from the [d]efendants,” as well as “concern[s] about retaliation,” he would “discontinue the litigation.” 3d Am. Compl. ¶ 16. Accordingly, on June 7, 2008, the plaintiff “executed ... acceptance forms for the $409.68 pension.” Id. ¶ 17. However, by a...

5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia – 2012
Charter Operators of Ala. v. Blank
"... ...         Any fishery management plan which is prepared by any Council, or by the ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia – 2022
Jacobs v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co.
"... ... promised to him under the terms of the plan are not ... provided, he can bring suit ... Becker v. Weinberg Grp., Inc. Pension Tr. , 473 ... F.Supp.2d 48, 58 (D.D.C ... Indus. Pension Fund v. Bristol Manor Healthcare ... 204. Nor did this Court in James v. Int'l Painters ... & Allied Trades ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana – 2017
Brooks v. Pacific, CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-0676
"... ... GEORGIA PACIFIC, L.L.C. HOURLY PENSION PLAN, ET AL.CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-0676UNITED STATES ... ] must follow in order to obtain benefits."James v. Int'l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia – 2013
Zalduondo v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., Civil No. 10–1685 (RCL).
"... ... the administrative record with the official Plan documents. I. BACKGROUND ... at 435 (quoting Wagener v. SBC Pension Benefit Plan—Non Bargained Program, 407 F.3d ... [defendant's] actions were reasonable.” James v. Int'l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia – 2020
Chipman v. Cigna Behavioral Health, Inc.
"... ... Chipman alleges that his health insurance plan administrator, Cigna, improperly denied coverage ... of material fact exists, do not apply." James v. Int'l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia – 2012
Charter Operators of Ala. v. Blank
"... ...         Any fishery management plan which is prepared by any Council, or by the ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia – 2022
Jacobs v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co.
"... ... promised to him under the terms of the plan are not ... provided, he can bring suit ... Becker v. Weinberg Grp., Inc. Pension Tr. , 473 ... F.Supp.2d 48, 58 (D.D.C ... Indus. Pension Fund v. Bristol Manor Healthcare ... 204. Nor did this Court in James v. Int'l Painters ... & Allied Trades ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — Western District of Louisiana – 2017
Brooks v. Pacific, CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-0676
"... ... GEORGIA PACIFIC, L.L.C. HOURLY PENSION PLAN, ET AL.CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-0676UNITED STATES ... ] must follow in order to obtain benefits."James v. Int'l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia – 2013
Zalduondo v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., Civil No. 10–1685 (RCL).
"... ... the administrative record with the official Plan documents. I. BACKGROUND ... at 435 (quoting Wagener v. SBC Pension Benefit Plan—Non Bargained Program, 407 F.3d ... [defendant's] actions were reasonable.” James v. Int'l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension ... "
Document | U.S. District Court — District of Columbia – 2020
Chipman v. Cigna Behavioral Health, Inc.
"... ... Chipman alleges that his health insurance plan administrator, Cigna, improperly denied coverage ... of material fact exists, do not apply." James v. Int'l Painters & Allied Trades Indus. Pension ... "

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex