From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pearce v. Carrier Corporation

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jul 10, 1992
966 F.2d 958 (5th Cir. 1992)

Summary

In Pearce, we considered whether a successful ADEA claimant could recoup automatically the value of a health insurance fringe benefit.

Summary of this case from Purcell v. Seguin State Bank and Trust Co.

Opinion

No. 91-8531.

July 10, 1992.

Peter F. Healey, Jr., Cherie B. Artz, Schnader, Harrison, Segal Lewis, Washington, D.C., Shelton E. Padgett, Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer Feld, San Antonio, Tex., for Carrier Corp.

Hubert L. Gill, Schaubhut Gill, Austin, Tex., for Tom Pearce.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas.

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, SMITH and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.


This matter is before the court on the appeal of Carrier Corporation of post-trial motions following an adverse judgment on jury verdict in an Age Discrimination in Employment Act case, together with the cross-appeal by Tom Pearce of an adverse summary judgment on claims for pension benefits and severance pay and adverse rulings on reinstatement or alternatively for front pay.

We are presented with an issue of first impression regarding whether an ADEA claimant must prove actual loss to recover damages for health insurance benefits or, in the alternative, whether the claimant automatically recoups the value of the insurance fringe benefit regardless of whether he has purchased substitute coverage or incurred out-of-pocket medical expenses. There is a split in the circuits. We agree with our colleagues in the Seventh and Ninth Circuits and now hold that an ADEA claimant is limited to recovery of those expenses actually incurred by either replacement of the lost insurance or occurrence of the insured risk.

See Kossman v. Calumet County, 800 F.2d 697 (7th Cir. 1986) and Galindo v. Stoody Co., 793 F.2d 1502 (9th Cir. 1986) (plaintiff must prove purchase of alternative coverage or expenses incurred in lieu thereof); but see Fariss v. Lynchburg Foundry, 769 F.2d 958 (4th Cir. 1985); Blackwell v. Sun Electric Corp., 696 F.2d 1176 (6th Cir. 1983) (not requiring actual damages proof).

Finding no merit in any other issue raised, the appealed judgments and rulings of the trial court are AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Pearce v. Carrier Corporation

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Jul 10, 1992
966 F.2d 958 (5th Cir. 1992)

In Pearce, we considered whether a successful ADEA claimant could recoup automatically the value of a health insurance fringe benefit.

Summary of this case from Purcell v. Seguin State Bank and Trust Co.

agreeing with the Seventh and Ninth Circuits

Summary of this case from Fresquez v. BNSF Ry. Co.
Case details for

Pearce v. Carrier Corporation

Case Details

Full title:TOM PEARCE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CROSS-APPELLANT, v. CARRIER CORPORATION…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

Date published: Jul 10, 1992

Citations

966 F.2d 958 (5th Cir. 1992)

Citing Cases

Brunnemann v. Terra Intern., Inc.

First of all, Brunnemann failed to supply evidence concerning the cost of the dental insurance premiums. He…

Purcell v. Seguin State Bank and Trust Co.

The requested award thus totaled at most $112,459, less than half of the jury award. The Bank argues that…