United States Eighth Circuit

In an action for wrongful denial of benefits under ERISA, summary judgment and an award of attorney's fees for plaintiffs is reversed where, although the retirement plan and the summary plan description used different language in defining eligibility for "Rule of 65" benefits, defendant's Benefit Appeals Committee did not abuse its discretion in concluding that plaintiffs were not eligible under either definition.

Appellate Information

• Decided 04/02/2007
• Published 04/02/2007

Judges

• LOKEN, Chief Judge., Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, JOHN R. GIBSON and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Eighth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Henry L. Solano, argued, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (Kathlyn Graves and Lisa L. Steele, on the brief), for appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Guy W. Murphy, Jr., argued, Little Rock, Arkansas (Gary D. Jiles, Philip Miron, and Danny Broaddrick, on the brief), for appellees.