Bennett

Bennett v. Alaska Electrical Trust Funds

Good Law
45 F. App'x 640
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 21, 2002No. 00-36103; D.C. No. CV-00-00197-JKSCalifornia385 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Claimant Jim Bennett sought to participate in an employee benefit plan by virtue of his membership in the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. The plan’s trustees denied him participation on the ground that he was not an “employee” for purposes of plan participation. Claimant challenged that decision, and the parties submitted the dispute to arbitration as is provided in the plan documents. The arbitrator found that the trustees’ reasons for excluding Claimant were erroneous as a matter of law and remanded the dispute to the trustees for a determination of Claimant’s “employee” status under another legal standard. Claimant sought modification of the arbitration award in the district court, arguing that the arbitrator “awarded upon a matter not submitted to” him. 9 U.S.C. § 11 (b). The district court disagreed with Claimant and dismissed the action. Claimant timely appeals. We affirm.

One of the questions presented to the arbitrator was “[wjhether the Trustees were in error on an issue of law.” In order to decide whether the trustees had applied a correct or an incorrect legal standard, the arbitrator implicitly was called on to consider what the correct…

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.