2007 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 12-21-2007 

# Ol a y v . M ot ion C ontr Ind P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 07-2768

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2007 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" Ol a y v . M ot ion C ontr Ind " (2007). 2007 D e cisio n s . P ape r 14. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a nova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007/14NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 07- 2768

___________ GL E NN H. OL AY, A ppel l ant

v. M O T I O N C O N T R O L I N D U ST R I E S, D i vi s i on of C ar l i s l e C orpor at i on; RE T I RE M E NT P L AN F OR BA RG AI NI NG UNI T E M P L OYE E S OF M OT I ON

C O N T R O L I N D U ST R I E S, D i vi s i on of C ar l i s l e C orpor at i on

____________________________________ O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e W e ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C
. C i vi l A ct i on N o. 04- C V
- 00266) D istri ct Ju d g e: H o n o rab le M au ri ce B . C o h il l, Jr.

____________________________________ Subm i t t ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

D ece m ber20, 2007 B efor e: SL O V I T E R , B A R R Y and W E I S, C i r cui tJ udges

( O pi ni on fi l ed D ece m ber21, 2007)

___________ OP I NI ON

___________ P E R C UR I AM G l enn H . O l ayappea l s fr om an or derof the U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ctC our tfort he W es t ern D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a, gr ant i ng, i n par t , defe ndant s / appel l ees ’ m ot i on forT he D i s t r i ctC our tdeni ed the def endant s ’ m ot i ons fors um m aryj udgm entt o t he 1 ext entt hati tfound thatt he pl ai nt i ffs w er e exc us ed fr om exhaus t i ng admi ni s t r at i ve re m e d ies . T h a t h o ld in g is n o t an iss u e in th is a p p e a l. S ix o thers a lso f

il ed sim il ar c o m p lai n ts ag ains t M o ti o n C o n tr o l. T h e D istri ct C o u rt 2 e n ter e d o n e o p in io n a n d o n e o rd e r th a t d e a lt w ith a ll se v e n c a se s. O lay i s th e o n ly p lain tiff to a p p e a l. 2 s u mma r yj u d g me n t . W e wi l l a f f i r m. 1 O l ayfi l ed a co m plai nt agai nsthis form er em ploy er, M oti on C on t rol Indust ri es, In c . (M o tio n C o n tro l), as se rtin g a c laim u n d e r th e E m p lo y e e R e tirem e n t In c o m e S e c u rity A c t (E R IS A ), 2 9 U .S .C . § 1 0 0 1 e t se q . O lay so u g h t a d e c lar a tio n th a t h e w a s e n tit led to 2
re c e iv e d isa b ili tyre tirem e n t b e n e f its u n d e r th e R e tirem e n t P lan f o r B a rg a in in g U n it E m p loy ee s o f M o ti o n C o n tr o l I n d u str ies (P lan). O lay w a s e m p lo y e d b yM o tio n C o n tro l an d w o rk e d a t it s R id g e w a y , P e n n sy lv a n ia f a c ili tyu n til it ce a se d o p e ra tio n s th e re o n Ja n u a ry1 1 , 2 0 0 2 . M o tio n C o n tro l p e rm a n e n tly l ai d off the R i dgew ayfac i l i t yempl oy ees butpr ovi ded the empl oy ees w i t h cont i nued
w ages and bene fi t s unt i l M ar ch 16, 2002. A ts om e poi ntt her eaf t er , O l ayappl i ed for Soci al Secur i t yD i s abi l i t yB enef i t s . T he Soci al Secur i t yA dm i ni s t r at i on, i n a dec i s i on d a te d M a rc h 1 2 , 2 0 0 4 , f o u n d th a t O la yw a s d is a b le d b e g in n in g o n J a n u a ry 1 1 , 2 0 0 2
. Som et i m e af

t ert hatdeci s i on, O l ayr eques t ed a di s abi l i t ycl ai m for m fr om M ot i on C o n tr o l, b u t w as re fu sed
. O layfil ed su itlat er tha t y ea r. I n i t s m ot i on fors um m aryj udgm ent , M ot i on C ont r ol ar gued, i nt eral i a, t hatunder Section 4.2(a) of the Plan, “‘ Disability Retirement’ benefits are available only where theO lay co n c e d e d in th e D istric t C o u rt th a t th e a rb itrar ya n d c a p ric io u s s tan d a rd w o u ld 3 n o rm all yap p ly , b u t urg ed the D istri ct C o u rtto rev iew the d ec isi o n d e n o v o , b ec au se th ere h a d b e e n n o a d mi n i s t r a t i v e d e c i s i o n . F o rt h e r e a s o n s s t a t e d b yth e Di s t r i c tCo u r t , we agr ee w i t h t he D i s t r i ctC our t ’ s hol di ng t hatt her e w as no r eas on t o r ej ectt he arbi t r aryand capr i ci ous s t andar d i n t hi s cas e. 3 P art i c ip ant ’ s ‘ e mp l o y

m e nt . . . t e r

m i n at e s . . . b e c a

u s e o f a D i s a

b i l i ty . ’ ”D oc. 18, at11. M ot i on C ont r ol ar gued thatO l ay ’ s empl oym entt erm i nat ed bec aus e of a pl antcl os i ng, and not beca us e of a di s abi l i t y . I n i t s opi ni on, t he D i s t r i ctC our tfi r s thel d t hatbeca us e the Pl an gi ves t he admi ni s t r at ordi s cr et i onaryauthor i t yt o det erm i ne el i gi bi l i t yforbenef i t s , t he C our tw oul d appl yan arbi t r aryand ca pr i ci ous s t andar d. D i s t . C t . O p. at19, ci t i ng G r i t zer
v. C B S, I nc. , 275 F. 3d 291, 295 ( 3d C i r . 2002) and Fi r es t one Ti r e & R ubberC o. v. B ruch, 4 8 9 U .S . 1 0 1 , 1 1 5 (1 9 8 9 ). T h e D istric t C o u rt th e n h e ld th a t M o tio n C o n tro l’s d e c isio n to 3 denybenef

i t s w as notarbi t r aryand ca pr i ci ous , as i tw as bas ed on a pl ai n r eadi ng of the Pl an. D i s t . C t . O p. at21. W e a g ree that M o ti o n C o n tr o l’ s d ec isi o n w as n o t arbitraryan d ca p ri ciou s. O lay ’s empl oym entw as nott er m i nat ed bec aus e of di s abi l i t y ; i n fac t , he w as notdet erm i ned t o be di s abl ed unt i l aboutt w o y ear s aft erhe w as l ai d off. T hus , undert he pl ai n r eadi ng of the P l an, he w as not el i gibl e for dis abil i t yret i rem ent benefit s. For t he for egoi ng r eas ons and thos e s t at ed byt he D i s t r i ctC our t , t he j udgm entof t he D i s t r i ctC our tw i l l be af fi r m ed.