This suit related to benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. Section 1001. The issue was whether P had to exhaust all his administrative remedies when, contrary to the requirements of the plan, a letter denying benefits did not inform P of his appeal procedures. Promises were exchanged as part of a complex agreement. The promises in the plan were characterized as bilateral. Under those contract terms, Pitney (D) was to inform P of the appeal procedure at the time they denied him benefits. They did not do so. D filed for a summary judgment based on the wording of the plan in that P had not exhausted all administrative remedies prior to filing suit. The trial court awarded D a summary judgment. P appealed.