Case Name: Edmund T. BIGGS, Appellant, v. DEERE & COMPANY; John Deere Company, sued as John Deere Davenport Works; International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local 281, Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-05-02
Citations: 177 F. App'x 528
Docket Number: No. 05-1988
Parties: Edmund T. BIGGS, Appellant, v. DEERE & COMPANY; John Deere Company, sued as John Deere Davenport Works; International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local 281, Appellees.
Judges: Before MELLOY, FAGG, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 177
Pages: 528–529

Head Matter:
Edmund T. BIGGS, Appellant, v. DEERE & COMPANY; John Deere Company, sued as John Deere Davenport Works; International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local 281, Appellees.
No. 05-1988.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: April 20, 2006.
Decided: May 2, 2006.
Edmund T. Biggs, Davenport, IA, pro se.
Richard M. Batcher, Bozeman & Neighbour, Moline, IL, for Deere & Company, John Deere Company, Sued as John Deere Davenport Works.
Michael J. Coyle, Fuerste & Carew, Dubuque, IA, for International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, Local 281.
Before MELLOY, FAGG, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Edmund T. Biggs appeals the district court's adverse grant of summary judgment in Biggs's Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) lawsuit. Having conducted de novo review, see Tor res v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., 405 F.3d 670, 677 (8th Cir.2005), we agree Biggs's ERISA claims must fail: the issues he raises are foreclosed by a settlement agreement he signed in 1991. Cf. Leavitt v. Nw. Bell Tel. Co., 921 F.2d 160, 162 (8th Cir.1990) (private settlements of ERISA claims do not compromise policies underlying ERISA). Biggs offered no evidence in support of his claims of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, or improper conduct involving either the settlement agreement or the calculation of his benefits. His remaining assertions are either raised for the first time on appeal or are without merit.
Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny the pending motion.
The Honorable Charles R. Wolle, United States District Judge for the southern District of Iowa.