Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Scott v. Bentley

United States District Court, N.D. Alabama, Northeastern Division

June 19, 2017

CALVIN W. SCOTT, Plaintiff,
v.
ROBERT BENTLEY, Governor of the State of Alabama, Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          MADELINE HUGHES HAIKALA UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         This memorandum opinion discusses pro se plaintiff Calvin Scott's claim against the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board or FRTIB.[1] Mr. Scott contends that the FRTIB did not provide spousal notification when his wife withdrew funds from her Thrift Savings Plan or TSP account. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56, the FRTIB asks the Court to enter judgment as a matter of law in its favor on Mr. Scott's claim. As explained below, there is no genuine issue of material fact, and the FRTIB is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

         I. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD

         “The court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). To demonstrate that there is a genuine dispute as to a material fact that precludes summary judgment, a party opposing a motion for summary judgment must cite “particular parts of materials in the record, including depositions, documents, electronically stored information, affidavits or declarations, stipulations (including those made for purposes of the motion only), admissions, interrogatory answers, or other materials.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(1)(A). “The court need consider only the cited materials, but it may consider other materials in the record.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c)(3). When considering a summary judgment motion, the Court must view the evidence in the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. See White v. Beltram Edge Tool Supply, Inc., 789 F.3d 1188, 1191 (11th Cir. 2015).

         II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

         The Thrift Savings Plan is a tax-deferred retirement savings and investment plan for federal employees. The FRTIB administers the plan. (Doc. 133-1, ¶ 3). There are two categories of TSP participants: Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS, for short) participants and Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS, for short) participants. (Doc. 133-1, ¶ 4).[2]

         While they were married, Mr. Scott's wife, Lucile Scott, worked for the federal government, and she was a CSRS participant in the TSP. (Doc. 133-1, ¶ 6). On December 6, 2010, before Mr. and Ms. Scott divorced, Ms. Scott applied for a loan from her TSP account. (Doc. 133-1, ¶ 7). That same day, the FRTIB prepared written notice regarding Ms. Scott's loan application and addressed the notice to Mr. Scott at 24977 Southern Heritage L, Athens, AL 35613-8400. (Doc. 133-1, ¶¶ 7-8; Doc. 133-2, p. 2). The letter states:

Dear Spouse of TSP Participant:
According to our records, your spouse has requested a loan from his or her Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) account.
By law, the TSP is required to notify you of your spouse's request. However, this notice does not guarantee or imply that you have a right to the money in your spouse's account or to any additional information about the account.
This notice will not delay payment from the account.
If you have questions, call the toll-free ThriftLine at 1-877-968-3773. Callers outside the United States and Canada should call (404) 233-4400 (not a toll-free number). The TSP's hours are Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 9 p.m., Eastern time. You can also write to the TSP. Please include your daytime telephone number and the participant's entire Social Security number on all correspondence. Note: If you are a member of the uniformed services, do not provide your Defense Switched Network (DSN) telephone number.

(Doc. 133-2, p. 2). The written notice clearly is a form notice. The notice is not signed, and it does not indicate a mode of delivery. The FRTIB states that it sent the notice to Mr. Scott. (Doc. 133-1, ¶¶ 7-8). Mr. Scott asserts that he did not receive a copy of the December 6, 2010 letter. (Doc. 145, pp. 3, 7).

         Mr. Scott contends that because Ms. Scott knew that FRTIB would not provide notice of her loan application, she felt comfortable hiding the loan a year later during the couple's divorce proceedings. Mr. Scott argues that the lack of notice from the FRTIB enabled Ms. Scott to lie about her financial situation in interrogatory responses that she provided during the divorce proceedings. (Doc. 145, pp. 2-4). Mr. Scott placed ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.