Date: 05-25-2001

Case Style: James F. Mullins v. Pfizer, Inc.

Case Number: 90-CV-917

Judge: Arterton

Court: United States District Court for the District of Connecticut

Plaintiff's Attorney: Joseph E. Moukawsher and Thomas G. Moukawsher of Moukawsher & Walsh, Groton, Connecticut

Defendant's Attorney: Jonath B. Orleans and S. Davie Vatti of Zeldes, Needle & Cooper, Bridgeport, Connecticut

Description: This ERISA case presents the familiar scenario of a large company seeking to reduce the size of its workforce by offering enhanced early retirement packages to particular employee groups. Plaintiff James Mullins missed one such package by taking early retirement six weeks before an enhancement was announced. He has sued his former employer claiming that Pfizer breached its fiduciary duties by failing to disclose to him the fact that the package was under consideration when he was trying to decide whether and when to retire. Summary judgment was initially granted on Mullins’ ERISA claims, but the Second Circuit reversed, see Mullins v. Pfizer, 23 F.3d 663 (2d Cir. 1994), and the case was remanded to this Court for trial.

After a four day trial, a jury returned a verdict in Mullins’ favor and judgment entered accordingly, but the judgment was later vacated after the Second Circuit decision in Sullivan v. LTV, 82 F.3d 1251 (2d Cir. 1996), that "there is no right to a jury trial in a suit to recover ERISA benefits. . . ." The parties agreed that the case would instead be tried to the Court , based upon the evidence presented at the September 1995 trial and further post-trial briefing reflective of subsequent, evolving legal authority bearing on issues presented by the trial evidence. This ruling follows.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the full text of the Court's opinion.

Outcome: Judgment in favor of Mullins in the amount of $39,000.00.

Plaintiff's Experts: Unknown

Defendant's Experts: Unknown

Comments: None