Neil Bergt v. The Retirement Plan for Pilots Employed by Markair, Inc.

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 6837·293 F.3d 1139·28 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1398·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 5400·2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 12034
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 19, 200299-36016California3,017 words

Opinion

Opinion

Brewster, J.

Neil G. Bergt (“Bergt”) appeals the lower court’s summary judgment order denying him retirement benefits covered under the Employment Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et. seq. (“ERISA”). The central question in this case is how to interpret an ERISA plan when the provisions of the plan master document are more favorable than, and conflict with, the statements of the plan summary. This Circuit has provided little guidance on this issue. The lower court held these conflicting provisions, when considered together, created an ambiguity that allowed the court to consider extrinsic evidence to determine the meaning of the ERISA plan. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We reverse.

I. Facts and Procedural History

Bergt, previously a pilot with MarkAir, Inc. (“the Company”), served as its President and Chairman of the Board of Directors from 1975 to 1995. Beginning in 1976, Bergt participated in the company-sponsored profit-sharing plan and from 1984, he participated in the Employee Stock Ownership Plan (“ESOP”). In 1980, the Company created an ERISA retirement plan that allowed employees who were pilots, or former pilots, to participate.…

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.