Jack RITTER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HUGHES AIRCRAFT CO., Defendant-Appellee

Caution
58 F.3d 454·95 Daily Journal DAR 8181·1995 WL 368889·42 Fed. R. Serv. 676·68 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 418
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 22, 199593-56711California2,278 words

Opinion

Opinion

Leavy, J.

Jack Ritter appeals from a grant of summary judgment in favor of Hughes Aircraft Co. Ritter claims that Hughes unlawfully discharged him: 1) because of his age, in violation of § 4 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C. § 623 , and 2) in order to prevent his retirement benefits from vesting, in violation of § 510 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1140 . We affirm.

FACTS AND PRIOR PROCEEDINGS

Jack Ritter (“Ritter”) was employed by Hughes Aircraft Co. (“Hughes”) from July of 1962 until August of 1979, when he voluntarily quit to pursue work as a real estate agent. Ritter was rehired as a Senior Project Engineer in the Fall of 1981, and he subsequently held a variety of positions in the company. Sometime after 1984, Ritter was appointed a Staff Manager. Six months after his last transfer, his supervisor suffered a heart attack and was replaced by a new supervisor. Ritter then began to receive negative evaluations. In 1987 he was notified that unless he could find employment elsewhere in the company he would be laid off.

Ritter was able to find employment as a Senior Project Engineer reporting to a former colleague of…

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.