United States Sixth Circuit

In an ERISA case arising from a company's deferred compensation plan, summary judgment for defendant holding that plaintiff-former employee was a participant in a "top hat" deferred compensation plan as defined by 29 U.S.C. section 1051(a)(2) is reversed where the plan at issue did not qualify as a "top hat" plan because it did not meet the "selectivity" requirements of 29 U.S.C. section 1051(2).

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/17/2007
• Published 01/17/2007

Judges

• Before MERRITT and BATCHELDER, Circuit Judges;  HEYBURN, Chief District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:  William J. O'Malley, O'Malley & Oglesbee, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant.  R. Gary Winters, McCaslin, Imbus & McCaslin, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellee.   ON BRIEF:  William J. O'Malley, O'Malley & Oglesbee, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant.  R. Gary Winters, Ian R. Smith, McCaslin, Imbus & McCaslin, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellee.