United States Ninth Circuit

In an action brought against former employer-Albertson's and a plan administrator challenging decisions regarding the company's stock-based incentive plan and alleging wrongful termination, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) the plan administrator correctly determined that plaintiff's stock options did not vest in 2001 as there was no "change in control" of the company, despite the resignation of various directors; 2) as stock options do not constitute wages under Idaho law, wrongful discharge claims relating to Idaho wage law and public policy failed; and 3) there was no breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing in plaintiff's termination as he was not denied "rights or benefits due" in relation to his attempt to exercise stock options; and 4) summary judgment in favor of defendant on a contract counterclaim was proper.

Appellate Information

• Argued 02/22/2005
• Decided 04/06/2007
• Published 04/06/2007

Judges

• BETTY B. FLETCHER, Circuit Judge:, Before: BETTY B. FLETCHER and GOULD, Circuit Judges, and KING, District Judge.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Bruce P. Paolini, Pro se, Virginia Beach, VA, plaintiff-counterdefendant-appellant., J. Walter Sinclair, Harry S. Chandler, & Wade L. Woodard, Stoel Rives LLP, Boise, ID, for defendant-counterclaimant-appellee Albertson's, Inc., and defendant-appellee the Plan Administration of Albertson's Amended and Restated Stock-BasedIncentive Plan.