Settle v. First Inter Bancorp
This text of Settle v. First Inter Bancorp (Settle v. First Inter Bancorp) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 98-11456 Summary Calendar
MARGARET S. SETTLE,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
FIRST INTERSTATE BANCORP BROAD-BASED CHANGE IN CONTROL SEVERANCE PAY PLAN,
Defendant-Appellee. _________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:98-CV-148-R _________________________________________________________________
August 6, 1999
Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Margaret S. Settle brought suit against the First Interstate
Bancorp Broad-Based Change In Control Severance Pay Plan for
wrongful denial of benefits under the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B). Settle
alleges the Plan wrongfully denied her request for severance
benefits following her resignation from her employment.
We review the Plan’s denial of Settle’s request for benefits
for abuse of discretion. See Threadgill v. Prudential Securities
* Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4. Group, Inc., 145 F.3d 286, 292 (5th Cir. 1998). Settle has argued
that the Plan, acting through the plan administrator, denied her
request for benefits using a legally incorrect interpretation of
the Plan. Settle must additionally address whether, in addition to
being legally incorrect, the plan administrator’s interpretation of
the Plan was an abuse of discretion. See Threadgill, 145 F.3d at
295. Settle has not met her burden to show that the plan
administrator’s interpretation of the Plan and denial of her
request for benefits was an abuse of discretion. The district
court’s granting of summary judgment in favor of the Plan is
A F F I R M E D.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Settle v. First Inter Bancorp, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/settle-v-first-inter-bancorp-ca5-1999.