Modzelewski v. Resolution Trust Corp.

3 Citing briefs

  1. Minn v. Allianz Asset Management of America L.P. et al

    REPLY

    Filed June 11, 2014

    Because ERISA’s definition of a pension plan is so broad, virtually any contract that provides for some type of deferred compensation will also establish a de facto pension plan, whether or not the parties intended to do so.” Modzelewski, 14 F.3d at 1377 (emphasis added). It is inherent in this principle that a benefit plan that provides for a distribution of awards during employment may, at the same time, constitute an ERISA-covered plan.

  2. Minn v. Allianz Asset Management of America L.P. et al

    RESPONSE

    Filed June 4, 2014

    Both are distinguishable from the instant case. Defendants cite to Modzelewski v. RTC, 14 F.3d 1374, 1376-1377 (9th Cir. 1994), and assert that essentially any contract that defers some compensation in any manner is a pension plan subject to ERISA. (MTD at 8:8-12).

  3. Minn v. Allianz Asset Management of America L.P. et al

    MOTION to Dismiss Or In The Alternative, Compel Arbitration

    Filed May 21, 2014

    The definition of pension plans subject to ERISA has been interpreted very broadly in the Ninth Circuit: "ERISA's definition of a pension plan is so broad, virtually any contract that provides for some type of deferred compensation will also establish a de facto pension plan, whether or not the parties intended to do so.” Modzelewski v. RTC, 14 F.3d 1374, 1376-77 (9th Cir. 1994) (emphasis added). As described above, the DIF Plan explicitly calls for payment of distributions upon the occurrence of four events: (1) the participating employee’s separation from service (early retirement, retirement, termination without cause, and planned termination); (2) the date the participating employee becomes disabled; (3) the participating employee’s date of death; or (4) the occurrence of an unforeseen emergency.