Estate of Bruce Barton v. Adt Security Services Pension

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 20, 201613-56379California1,182 words

Opinion

Opinion

FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ESTATE OF BRUCE H. BARTON,* No. 13-56379 Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. v. 2:12-cv-06971-

BRO-CW

ADT SECURITY SERVICES PENSION

PLAN, a pension plan; TYCO

INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT ORDER

COMPANY, as plan sponsor; TYCO

INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT

COMPANY, LLC, Administrative Committee, Defendants-Appellees.

Filed September 20, 2016

Before: Alex Kozinski, Sandra S. Ikuta, and John B. Owens, Circuit Judges.

Order; Dissent by Judge N.R. Smith

* The Estate of Bruce H. Barton is substituted as Plaintiff-Appellant pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 43(a). SUMMARY**

Employee Retirement Income Security Act

The panel denied a petition for panel rehearing and, on behalf of the court, denied a petition for rehearing en banc in an ERISA case.

Dissenting from the denial of rehearing en banc, Judge N.R. Smith, joined by Judges O’Scannlain, Gould, Tallman, Bybee, Callahan, Bea and Ikuta, wrote that the panel’s opinion ignored Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit precedent in placing on the ERISA plan administrator the burden…

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.