Asmus

Asmus v. Pacific Bell

Good Law
1 F. App'x 683
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 10, 2001No. 97-16236; D.C. No. CV-96-00067-CW/FSLCalifornia280 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM

On October 23, 1998, we filed a Memorandum affirming the district court’s grant of summary judgment against the plaintiffs/appellees on their claims of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, and discrimination in violation of ERISA. We held in abeyance the defendants/appellants’ cross-appeal of summary judgment in favor of eight plaintiffs on their breach of contract claim, and as to that issue, certified a question to the California Supreme Court. On August 16, 2000, the California Supreme Court responded that under California law,

An employer may terminate a written employment security policy that contains a specified condition, if the condition is one of indefinite duration and the employer makes the change after a reasonable time, on reasonable notice, and without interfering with the employees’ vested benefits.

Asmus v. Pacific Bell, 23 Cal.4th 1, 18 , 96 Cal.Rptr.2d 179 , 999 P.2d 71 (Cal.2000).

The California Supreme Court’s response to the certified question makes clear that Pacific Bell had the right to terminate its Management Employment Security Policy as it did. The MESP did not have a fixed period of duration; its termination was preceded by reasonable…

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.