Bryan Rhode v. CSX Transportation, Inc., No. 22-10909 (11th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
USCA11 Case: 22-10909 Document: 48-1 Date Filed: 09/11/2023 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 22-10909 ____________________ BRYAN RHODE, Plainti -Appellant, versus CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC., Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 3:20-cv-00480-MMH-MCR ____________________ Before WILSON, GRANT, and BRASHER, Circuit Judges. USCA11 Case: 22-10909 2 Document: 48-1 Date Filed: 09/11/2023 Opinion of the Court Page: 2 of 3 22-10909 PER CURIAM: Bryan Rhode is a former executive-level employee at CSX Transportation, Inc. (CSX). After CSX denied Rhode’s claim for severance pay and benefits under the company’s Executive Severance Plan (the Plan), Rhode brought this action in the Middle District of Florida, alleging violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1132. Adopting the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation, the district court concluded that (1) the Plan Administrator had a reasonable basis for her decision to deny benefits, (2) Rhode received a full and fair review of his claim, and (3) Rhode failed to establish that any conflict of interest tainted the Plan Administrator’s decision so as to render the decision arbitrary and capricious. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of CSX. On appeal, Rhode argues that the Plan Administrator’s denial of his claim based on her determination that he voluntarily resigned constituted an abuse of discretion. Rhode contends that he did not voluntarily resign—rather, he was involuntarily terminated. Second, Rhode argues that the Plan Administrator did not engage in a full and fair review of the decision to deny his claim because she failed to review his emails, files, and calendar entries or interview his colleagues as requested to evaluate whether he in fact intended to resign from CSX. Finally, Rhode argues that the district court failed to properly consider the Plan Administrator’s conflicts of interest in its analysis. USCA11 Case: 22-10909 Document: 48-1 22-10909 Date Filed: 09/11/2023 Opinion of the Court Page: 3 of 3 3 After careful consideration of the record and the parties’ briefs, and with the benefit of oral argument, we find no reversible error in the district court’s judgment. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of CSX. AFFIRMED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
