Ronald Adcock, Cross v. The Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, Cross

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the sale of a division, not resulting in displacement of employees, did not constitute a reduction in force; noting split among courts on the issue
• noting that “courts have often held that unemployment should be a prerequisite for benefits”
• noting plan language “states the goal of the plan is to reduce the stress of terminated employees between the time of their release and securing other employment” in concluding “it is a fair reading of the plan to require unemployment as a prerequisite to ... termination pay.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).