Pabst Brewing Co. v. Leo J. Anger
PABST BREWING CO., Appellee, v. Leo J. ANGER, Et Al., Appellants
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
This is an action for declaratory judgment brought by Pabst Brewing Company against certain of its former employees. Pabst seeks a declaration that it does not owe the defendants severance pay. Defendants worked at a brewery in St. Paul, Minnesota, which Pabst had acquired in 1982 from Olympia Brewing Co. As part of the acquisition agreement, Pabst agreed to abide by Olympia’s Separation From Employment Policy (SFEP) until March 18, 1984. Later, Pabst transferred the brewery to Stroh Brewery Company in exchange for a Stroh’s brewery in Tampa, Florida. Stroh’s agreed to continue the Olympia SFEP for employees of the former Pabst brewery in St. Paul until March 18, 1984, the SFEP’s agreed termination date.
The question presented is whether the former Pabst employees suffered a “layoff,” defined as “a permanent, involuntary separation without cause,” when they ceased to be employees of Pabst upon transfer of the Olympia brewery to Stroh’s.
The District Court 1
granted summary judgment for Pabst, holding that denial of severance benefits was not arbitrary, capricious, or abuse of discretion under the standards stated in Quinn v. Burlington Northern Inc., Etc., 664 F.2d 675 , 678 (8th Cir.1981), and the Eighth Circuit cases cited therein. The employees continued to work without interruption (with the exception of three men who received SFEP benefits), some at a higher rate of pay. They did lose certain benefits with Pabst, including the right to participate in the Pabst Employee Stock Ownership Plan, but, in the view of the District Court, it was not unreasonable for Pabst, as plan administrator, to interpret the term “layoff” as not applying to this set of facts.
We agree, and the judgment is affirmed on the basis of the District Court’s well- *339 reasoned opinion, reported at 610 F.Supp. 214 (D.Minn.1985).
Affirmed.
1
. The Hon. Edward J. Devitt, Senior United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 27 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Clyde Simmons and Lloyd Cole v. Diamond Shamrock Corporation
- Bruch v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
- Simmons v. Diamond Shamrock Chemicals Co.
- Robert W. Heidgerd v. Olin Corporation
- Lakey v. Remington Arms Co.
- Carol L. Harper Jerre Sardou v. R.H. MacY & Company, Inc., and Dillard's Department Stores, Inc., Maureen H. Shawver Marilyn J. Barbour Bonnie Beth Maxine Briggs Linda M. Cain Nora Daugherty Anne C. Gooch Patricia W. Harris Ila June Hayes Prentice J. Hildebrand Jeanette R. Holbert Marsha R. Holderness Patricia A. Kratz Marilyn Krohn G. Maxine Moenkhoff Eleanor L. Ninemire Dale Prewitt Gloria F
Most recent
- Gruenke v. Miles, Inc., Welfare Plan
- Schroeder v. Phillips Petroleum Company
- Schroeder v. Phillips Petroleum Co.
- United Paperworkers International Union, Local 14 v. International Paper Co.
- Kotrosits v. GATX Corp. Non-Contributory Pension Plan for Salaried Employees
- Carol L. Harper Jerre Sardou v. R.H. MacY & Company, Inc., and Dillard's Department Stores, Inc., Maureen H. Shawver Marilyn J. Barbour Bonnie Beth Maxine Briggs Linda M. Cain Nora Daugherty Anne C. Gooch Patricia W. Harris Ila June Hayes Prentice J. Hildebrand Jeanette R. Holbert Marsha R. Holderness Patricia A. Kratz Marilyn Krohn G. Maxine Moenkhoff Eleanor L. Ninemire Dale Prewitt Gloria F
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.