Skip to main content

Eijinio Banuelos v. Construction Laborers' Trust Funds for Southern California

9th CircuitAugust 24, 2004No. 02-57096Cited 83 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Fletcher, Pregerson, Brunetti
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's denial of summary judgment, holding that the district court erred by considering evidence outside the administrative record. The court remanded with instructions to the plan administrator to calculate Banuelos's pension based on the five-year vesting provision.

What This Ruling Means

**Worker Wins Pension Battle Against Trust Fund** Eijinio Banuelos worked in construction and paid into a pension fund managed by the Construction Laborers' Pension Trust for Southern California. When Banuelos tried to claim his pension benefits, the trust fund denied his request. Banuelos believed he had worked long enough to qualify for benefits under the pension plan's rules, but the trust disagreed about how to calculate his qualifying work time. The federal appeals court sided with Banuelos. The court found that a lower court had made an error by looking at evidence that wasn't part of the official pension plan records when making its decision. The appeals court sent the case back with clear instructions: the pension fund must recalculate Banuelos's benefits using a "five-year vesting provision" - essentially a rule that determines when workers become eligible for their full pension benefits. This ruling matters because it protects workers' pension rights. It shows that courts will carefully review how pension administrators make decisions and ensure they follow the plan's written rules. Workers who believe their pension benefits have been wrongly denied may have legal options to challenge those decisions.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.