Rosemarie Cole v. the Permanente Medical Group

Good Law
609 F. App'x 445
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 1, 201513-15952California286 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Rosemarie Cole appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of The Permanente Medical Group on Cole’s claim that Permanente terminated her employment in violation of § 510 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

ERISA § 510 provides that “[i]t shall be unlawful for any person to discharge ... a participant [in an employee benefit plan] ... for the purpose of interfering with the attainment of any right to which such participant may become entitled under the plan.” 29 U.S.C. § 1140 . The district court concluded that Cole established a prima facie ease of discrimination under § 510 because she was discharged 18 months before she would have been entitled to additional benefits under her pension plan. Even if she established a prima facie case, Cole’s claim fails because Per-manente articulated a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for terminating Cole. See Ritter v. Hughes Aircraft Co., 58 F.3d 454, 456-57 (9th Cir.1995) (applying burden shifting analysis applicable to Title VII and ADEA claims to claim brought under § 510 of ERISA). Cole was terminated because she…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.