Opinion ID: 2966374
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Questech's Payments Under the Plan

Text: Upon retiring, Denzler requested a statement of his benefits. The Administrator of the Def Com Plan, an executive committee of the Questech Board of Directors, sent Denzler a letter dated October 2, 1990 (the October letter) indicating that Denzler would be paid the sum of both a basic benefit and an added benefit. The basic benefit was $94,176 and the added benefit $255,830. The basic benefit, however, was reduced because of early retirement to $53,191--the actuarial equivalent amount of $94,176. The added amount of $255,830 remained the same. Questech paid Denzler annual installments based on the sum of both the added benefit and basic benefit in 1990, 1991, and 1992. In 1993, however, the Plan Administrator reduced the benefit paid to Denzler as a result of the failure of the Def Com Plan holdings to generate the expected rates of return.2 The Administrator argued that the reduced payments were justified because under the terms of the Def Com Plan, Denzler was entitled to a basic benefit only. _________________________________________________________________ F.2d 923, 935-37 (3d Cir. 1985), overruled on other grounds, Pritzker v. Merrill Lynch, 7 F.3d 1110 (3d Cir. 1993); Kemmerer, 842 F. Supp. at 141; Carr v. First Nationwide Bank, 816 F. Supp. 1476, 1486 (N.D. Cal. 1993). The enforcement provisions of ERISA described in 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a), however, apply to Top Hat plans. Barrowclogh, 752 F.2d at 935-37; Kemmerer, 842 F. Supp. at 141; Carr, 816 F. Supp. at 1486. 2 The Def Com Plan was failing to produce an expected 10% rate of return, which was exacerbated by the fact that the number of participants in the Def Com Plan had dropped dramatically and the assumed mortality of participants had not occurred. 3