TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Richard H. Nelson v. American Air Filter Company, Inc.

Richard H. NELSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMERICAN AIR FILTER COMPANY, INC., Defendant-Appellee

Nelson v. Am. Air Filter Co., 472 F.2d 1169 (9th Cir. 1973)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
January 16, 1973
Docket
No. 26695
Judges
Chambers, Duniway, Goodwin, Per Curiam
Citations
472 F.2d 11691973 U.S. App. LEXIS 12162

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

Richard H. Nelson appeals a summary judgment which held that he was not entitled to participate in a pension plan created seven years after he left the employment of American Air Filter Co., Inc. We affirm.

Nelson was formerly employed by The Herman Nelson Corporation, and was a participant in its employee-pension plan. While so employed, Nelson became eligible to take a “leave of absence” that would protect his benefits under the existing Herman Nelson pension plan in the event of the termination of his employment before he reached retirement age. In 1950, Herman Nelson was merged with American Air Filter Co., Inc. Nelson continued to work for American Air Filter until 1960, when he was placed on a “leave of absence.” He performed no further services. After nine years on “leave,” Nelson reached retirement age, and in 1969 began drawing the benefits to which he was entitled under the Herman Nelson plan.

*1170 American Air Filter Co., Inc., in 1967 established a new pension plan whose benefits were greater than those enjoyed by Nelson under his old plan. He applied for the enhanced benefits, but was denied participation in the 1967 plan on the ground that the plan, by its terms, excluded from coverage any employee whose “employment terminated” before the effective date of the plan. The district court held that Nelson’s employment had terminated in 1960, and that he was not entitled to participate in a voluntary plan created after his employment had ceased. This was a correct construction of the operative facts and documents.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1978: 119782026peak 1978 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. B. G. Hicks v. Pacific Maritime Association567 F.2d 355 (9th Cir. 1978)

Most recent

  1. B. G. Hicks v. Pacific Maritime Association567 F.2d 355 (9th Cir. 1978)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list