You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Cattin v. General Motors Corp.

Citations: 806 F. Supp. 160; 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17093; 1992 WL 322280Docket: No. 84-CV-48601

Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan; November 4, 1992; Federal District Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case concerns a dispute over the vesting of stock grants for a former employee of Electronic Data Systems Corporation (EDS), governed by the Restricted Stock Agreement. The plaintiff, having left EDS at age fifty-two, challenges the denial of a full stock grant, claiming entitlement based on age and service conditions. The defendants argue that full vesting is only available upon retirement at age fifty-five or older, as per the Agreement. The court examines the policy allowing vesting continuation for employees meeting early retirement age and highlights the discretionary power to repurchase unvested shares. Plaintiffs cite cases where exceptions were made but acknowledge the plaintiff's voluntary departure as a distinguishing factor. Statements by GM's Chairman intended to influence the interpretation of stock grants as employee benefits were deemed inadmissible under the parol evidence rule. Furthermore, a subsequent letter outlined provisions for combined service retirement, clarifying that such benefits apply only to retirement eligibility and not to stock grant vesting. The court denied the plaintiffs’ Motion for Supplemental Relief, upholding the terms of the Agreement and confirming that the plaintiff's choice of retirement path precluded full stock grant benefits.

Legal Issues Addressed

Discretionary Power of Repurchase

Application: The decision highlights the defendants' discretionary authority to repurchase unvested shares when employees leave before the vesting period ends, underlining the contractual terms.

Reasoning: Defendants acknowledge that out of 906 former employees, fifty-four continue to vest stocks despite their early separations, but emphasize their discretionary power to repurchase unvested shares as outlined in Paragraph 4(e) of the Agreement.

Eligibility for Retirement Benefits

Application: The court considers the eligibility criteria for retirement benefits and how they relate to stock grant vesting, emphasizing the necessity to meet age and service requirements.

Reasoning: Cattin, having left EDS after five years and prior to age fifty-five, is deemed ineligible for early retirement and is entitled to only 435 shares (50% of the grant), which has since increased to 3,480 shares due to stock splits.

Interpretation of Combined Service Retirement Provisions

Application: Clarifies the conditions under which combined service retirement is applicable, affecting eligibility for retirement but not altering stock grant vesting terms.

Reasoning: This letter permits GM employees who transferred to EDS to retire from GM after completing at least thirty years of combined service, provided they leave EDS before age fifty-five.

Parol Evidence Rule

Application: The rule was applied to exclude external statements by corporate executives as they contradict the written terms of the Agreement, reaffirming the inadmissibility of such evidence.

Reasoning: They assert that if the stock grant was meant to compensate for pension losses, ERISA would apply... they acknowledge that Smith's statements lack support in the Agreement and conflict with the plan's purpose, thus falling under the parol evidence rule and being inadmissible in court.

Vesting of Stock Grants under Restricted Stock Agreement

Application: The case examines the conditions under which an employee's stock grant vests, particularly focusing on the age and service requirements for full vesting as stipulated in the Agreement.

Reasoning: If an employee leaves before full vesting for reasons other than death, disability, or retirement, EDS or GM may repurchase unvested shares at the original price.