need help figuring out how to argue contract is ambiguous for vesting of retiree benefits in 2nd circuit

[Guest lawgirl2004]

lost in district court, judge in 2nd circuit said contract is not ambiguous so we can't bring in extrinsic evidence to interpret contract. extrensic evidence would help us since co. sent letters to retireers saying they have lifetime benefits. does anyone know of any case law 2nd circuit or any other circuit that would help me argue the following:

1) that the co. made a promise to vest benefits for life.

2) contract is ambiguous

3) need to look at extrinsic evidence

4) anything else.

unfortunately the contract looks pretty straightforward b/c co. has a clause on right to amend/terminate. and says plan/coverage is only for duration of contract.

any ideas greatly appreciated.

[mbozek]

Is this lifetime health ins benefits for retirees? I thought the issue was decided by the 2nd circuit in the Met life case about 15 years ago which held that the controlling documents were the plan and SPD and that extrinsic evidence cannot be introduced if the those documents clearly define the right to curtail benefits. Have you reviewed that case? The Met life case should be reported under ERISA 502. Also check the Curtis -Wright case decided by the US supreme Ct about 10 yrs ago that permitted a welfare plan to be amended to eliminate a lifetime health care benefit for retirees. These cases should have been researched before you went to trial.