Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No. 09-1821
JOSEPH S. LEONE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
TYCO ELECTRONICS CORPORATION,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:08-cv-00290-F)
Argued:
December 7, 2010
Decided:
wrote
the
Leone
brought
this
action
against
his
former
Leone alleged
Leone also
violated
the
North
Carolina
Wage
and
Hour
Act
(the
The district
court also held that Leone failed to establish a claim for wages
under the Act.
We affirm.
I.
Between 1996 and 2006, Leone worked as a mold maker for
Tyco.
In
November
disability benefits.
a
bipolar
disorder
2006,
he
filed
claim
for
short-term
Dr.
Jason
Crandell
and
for
sleep
short-term
disability
Services,
Inc.
administrator,
(Hoover),
informed
Hoover
Leone
that
Rehabilitation
his
short-term
benefits.
Upon
representative
receipt
contacted
of
Leones
Tycos
application,
corporate
medical
After
speaking
claim
with
be
reviewing
Dr.
Smith,
denied.
Leones
Dr.
medical
Bates
According
to
documentation
and
recommended
that
Leones
Dr.
the
medical
Bates,
These documents
between
the
period
that
he
was
working
without
restriction and the time that he requested resumption of shortterm disability benefits.
Leone
letter
notifying
him
his
appeal
had
been
denied.
After receiving Hoovers denial letter, Leone asked for the
opportunity to submit additional documentation to support his
claim.
Hoover
agreed
and
conducted
review
of
Leones
Tyco stated
that its decision was based on the fact that Leone had been
absent
from
work
since
June
6,
2007,
that
his
short-term
disability claim and appeal had been denied, and that he had
exhausted his leave under the Family Medical Leave Act.
In June 2008, Leone filed an action against Tyco in Wake
County Superior Court in North Carolina. In the complaint, Leone
alleged that Tyco breached a contractual provision in the shortterm
disability
policy
disability benefits.
by
refusing
to
pay
him
short-term
The
Tyco on Leones claim under the Act, concluding that Tyco did
not owe Leone wages after the effective date of his termination.
Leone filed a timely an appeal in this court challenging the
district courts judgment.
II.
We review an award of summary judgment de novo.
Homeland
Training Ctr., LLC v. Summit Point Auto. Research Ctr., 594 F.3d
285, 290 (4th Cir. 2010).
is
appropriate
when
there
is
no
genuine
dispute
as
to
any
III.
We first address Leones argument that Tyco breached its
contract
by
benefits.
refusing
to
pay
Leone
short-term
disability
North
is
Carolina
unilateral
law,
Tycos
contract
in
short-term
which
Tyco
disability
offered
its
387
Memorex
1995).
S.E.2d
Telex
A
80,
Corp.,
Tyco
81
454
employee
maintaining employment.
(N.C.
Ct.
S.E.2d
accepts
App.
278,
that
1990);
282-83
offer
Hamilton
(N.C.
by
Ct.
v.
App.
entering
or
whole,
context.
and
that
individual
clauses
are
construed
in
their
Mezzanotte v.
discretionary
power
when
the
A contract
contract
language
provides one party with the right to exercise its sole judgment.
See Midulla v. Howard A. Cain Co., 515 S.E.2d 244, 246 (N.C. Ct.
App. 1999).
We consider the plain language of the short-term disability
contract.
See
Holshouser
v.
Shaner
Hotel
Group
Props.
Ltd.
The stated
and
Long-Term
Disability
occupational illness/injury.
Benefits
for
non-
policy
includes
Disability Procedure.
section
entitled
Short-Term
procedure
section
of
the
policy
also
explains
the
disability
the
claim.
employee
must
For
example,
provide
medical
if
claim
updates
to
is
the
The
designee,
whose
decision
shall
be
final,
shall
make
any
disability
requirements
for
benefits
if
the
establishment
employee
of
meets
short-term
the
policys
disability.
policy
including
8
the
disclaimer
and
the
See Sec.
disability
with
the
right
to
file
claim
for
discretionary
to
power
approve
disability
benefits
or
deny
claims.
See
therefore
is
contingent
upon
Tycos
argument,
Leone
exclusively
relies
on
In advancing
court
decisions
Ins. Co., 305 F.3d 264, 268-69 (4th Cir. 2002); Herzberger v.
Standard Ins. Co., 205 F.3d 327, 331-32 (7th Cir. 2000).
ERISA
cases,
which
reflect
the
fiduciary
relationship
These
of
an
See
Griggs v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co., 237 F.3d 371, 379-80
(4th Cir. 2001) (discussing the responsibilities of a fiduciary
9
under
ERISA).
concerning
As
Tycos
explained
above,
contractual
we
authority
reach
upon
our
conclusion
consideration
of
required
reasonable
manner
to
exercise
based
its
upon
discretionary
good
faith
and
power
in
fair
play.
documentation,
and
relied
on
Dr.
Bates
various
not
failed
presented
any
evidence
that
Tyco
to
exercise
its
Therefore, we hold
that the district court did not err in granting summary judgment
to Tyco on Leones breach of contract claim.
IV.
Leone
next
challenges
the
district
courts
decision
employers must pay all wages and tips accruing to the employee
on the regular payday.
further
[e]mployees
provides
that
10
whose
The Act
employment
is
N.C.
Act
rendered
25.2(16).
vacation
defines
by
wages
an
as
compensation
employee.
N.C.
for
Gen.
labor
Stat.
or
95-
severance
pay,
commissions,
bonuses,
and
other
However, if the
among
other
things,
that
an
employer
notify
its
if
we
Id.
assume,
without
deciding,
that
short-term
claim
under
the
Act.
Tycos
policy
did
not
guarantee
Under the
Leone
never
accrued
short-term
disability
benefits
for
Corp. v. Triplett, 605 S.E.2d 492, 496 (N.C. Ct. App. 2004).
Therefore, we conclude that the district court did not err in
awarding summary judgment to Tyco on Leones claim for wages
under the Act.
For these reasons, we affirm the district courts award of
summary judgment to Tyco.
AFFIRMED
12