Moeller v. Bertrang
United States District Court for the District of South Dakota
801 F. Supp. 291 (1992)
- Written by Kelsey Libby, JD
Facts
Bernie’s Body Shop (Bernie’s) (defendant) established a retirement plan as follows: any employee who remained employed for at least five consecutive years would be eligible at age 62 to receive a lump sum payment equal to $1,000 per year of service. The retirement plan was not reduced to writing, but there was no dispute that the promise was made. To date, one employee had received a lump sum under the conditions of employment. Joseph Moeller (plaintiff) was employed by Bernie’s for almost 25 years. Moeller stopped working at Bernie’s before age 62, and Bernie’s thus deemed Moeller ineligible for the lump-sum payout. Moeller filed suit against Bernie’s under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Bernie’s argued that the retirement plan was not covered by ERISA.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Porter, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.