Pisciotta

Pisciotta v. Teledyne Industries, Inc.

Good Law
91 F.3d 1326·96 Daily Journal DAR 9439·1996 WL 435605·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 19188·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5786
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 5, 1996No. 94-55862, CV-93-14-JNKCalifornia2,778 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Appellants seek review of the district court’s orders dismissing Appellants’ seventh and eighth causes of action, granting summary judgment in favor of Teledyne Industries, Inc. And Teledyne, Inc. (“Teledyne”) and denying Appellants’ motion to amend their complaint to add a claim based on promissory estoppel. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm the district court’s orders.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Appellants are approximately 400 present and former salaried employees of Appellee, Teledyne Industries, Inc. Appellants contend that Teledyne violated ERISA when it imposed a monetary cap on the amount it would pay for medical insurance for retired employees. In 1972 Teledyne established a medical insurance policy for its employees which provided that upon retirement of any salaried employee with 15 or more years of continuous service, it would pay the entire health care insurance premiums for the remainder of the employee’s life and the remainder of the employee’s spouse’s life. Subsequently, Teledyne announced modifications of the health care benefits, limiting the amount it would pay for medical insurance premiums for retired employees.

In…

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.