October Term 2003 · Docket 02-891
Can a pension plan cut benefits for early retirees who take new jobs?
Two early retirees claim a pension fund broke its promise by cutting their benefits after they took new jobs.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Goldstein argued the case involves an ERISA pension plan. He stated the retirees accrued full pensions. He noted they took early retirement at age 39.
Mr. Gossett argued the fund promised specific job rights. He claimed the retirees accepted early retirement packages. He stated they should work without sacrificing pensions.
Mr. Elwood argued the IRS approved similar plan amendments. He stated the IRS allowed these amendments for existing benefits. He claimed this practice lasted for at least twenty years.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 1-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 1-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 36-29 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 36-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-25 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 16-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-14 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 40-6 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 40-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 10-6 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 10-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 10-14 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 10-14
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The Central Laborers' Pension Fund argues it can reduce benefits for early retirees who take new jobs. The retirees argue the fund promised them full benefits regardless of new work.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 1-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 1-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 36-29 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 36-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-25 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 16-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 40-6 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 40-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 10-6 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 10-6
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 19, 2004.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-14 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 10-14 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 10-14
What each side wants
The pension fund wants to reduce benefits for early retirees who take new jobs.
The retirees want to keep their full promised pension benefits.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 1-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 1-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 36-29 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 36-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-25 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 16-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 40-6 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 40-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 10-6 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 10-6
What each side says
The fund argues IRS rules allow plans to cut benefits for new employment.
The retirees argue the fund promised full benefits without job restrictions.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 1-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 1-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 36-29 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 36-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-25 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 16-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 40-6 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 40-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 10-6 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 10-6
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Rehnquist asked if the Seventh Circuit distinguished early retirement benefits from normal retirement benefits.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 10-14 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 10-14
Why it matters
This case determines whether pension plans can cut benefits for early retirees who take new jobs. It affects the financial security of workers who leave the workforce early. It clarifies the scope of pension promises made to employees.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 1-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 1-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 36-29 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 36-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-25 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 16-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 40-6 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 40-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 10-6 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 10-6
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 4-14 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 4-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 10-14 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 10-14
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 1-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 1-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 36-29 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 36-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-25 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 16-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 40-6 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 40-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 10-6 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 10-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 20, lines 1-27 — Transcript, file page 20, lines 1-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 29, lines 36-29 — Transcript, file page 29, lines 36-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 16-25 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 16-25
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 51, lines 40-6 — Transcript, file page 51, lines 40-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 55, lines 10-6 — Transcript, file page 55, lines 10-6
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.