Search for: "All ERISA Plaintiffs "
Results 41 - 60
of 963
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Dec 2017, 8:17 am
The scheme culminated, according to Plaintiffs, in the sale of substantially all assets to C&W Wholesale Grocers, Inc. [read post]
25 Jan 2016, 2:20 pm
The Court in Fifth Third rejected that idea, explaining that the language of ERISA’s fiduciary duties applies equally to all plans, whether they do or do not own employer stock. [read post]
9 Jan 2025, 1:15 pm
The lawyers at McKennon Law Group PC have all of the above and then some. [read post]
2 Jul 2019, 8:56 am
The plaintiff alleged that the Plan met ERISA’s definition of an employee pension plan because it permitted employees to designate part or all of their award under the Plan toward their retirement account. [read post]
18 Nov 2014, 7:09 am
As an evidentiary bar, this requirement separates the routine case where there is a random misstatement from a low level HR person upon which a plaintiff’s lawyer tries to fashion an entire estoppel claim (which federal court judges have been seeing, and for the most part rejecting, for years) from a deliberate pattern and practice of self-serving conduct that harms participants (and which federal court judges don’t see all that often). [read post]
12 Feb 2024, 7:11 am
The plaintiff, Mark Zavislak, the beneficiary of the defendant’s health benefit plan, alleges that he did not receive all of health and welfare plan documents requested, which he alleges is a violation of Section 104 or ERISA. [read post]
4 Feb 2008, 10:52 am
Consequently, some courts have noted that fees or costs seldom should be assessed against unsuccessful ERISA plaintiffs. [read post]
24 May 2018, 7:27 am
Tenn. 2009), the plaintiff’s policy bore the hallmarks of both an ERISA and a non-ERISA policy. [read post]
20 Apr 2018, 1:18 pm
The bankruptcy court granted this Plaintiff a full “no-asset” discharge of her debts, meaning she was relieved of all duty to repay any of “her many creditors. [read post]
10 Sep 2015, 5:16 am
" The court has held that granting summary judgment for the plaintiff is appropriate, even if the plaintiff had not moved for summary judgment. [read post]
5 Apr 2022, 10:02 am
After the Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissal based on lack of statutory standing, the Supreme Court concluded the plaintiffs lacked Article III standing because they had, at all times, received the benefits due to them under the plan and were therefore unable to show they suffered harm. [read post]
26 Sep 2007, 8:33 am
There, I did it - two items on two different issues, all for the price of one admission. [read post]
24 May 2018, 7:27 am
Tenn. 2009), the plaintiff’s policy bore the hallmarks of both an ERISA and a non-ERISA policy. [read post]
19 Nov 2012, 6:55 am
This section provides that ERISA shall supersede any and all State laws insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to any employee benefit plan. [read post]
12 May 2025, 6:23 am
All the Justices agreed with Justice Sotomayor’s opinion of the Court that section 408 of ERISA lists affirmative defenses to a section 406 prohibited transaction claim, and that plaintiffs should never have to plead the absence of affirmative defenses when drafting a complaint. [read post]
11 Aug 2009, 9:01 pm
A former employee was an ERISA "plan participant" even though he had withdrawn all of his assets from a defined contribution plan. [read post]
26 Jun 2012, 3:26 pm
Although some insurers will behave in a responsible way, all too many of them refuse to reduce their lien even by the amount it cost the plaintiff to acquire the money for them. [read post]
2 Dec 2014, 4:05 am
These costs could be avoided, perhaps entirely, by a reversal at the Court of Appeals.The district court stayed all further proceedings in the case until the 9th Circuit decides whether to take the appeal. [read post]
20 Jan 2016, 1:04 pm
The ERISA plan was chided by the court for ignoring the plaintiff's attorney's request to object before he disbursed the money to his client. [read post]
8 Apr 2020, 7:34 am
Mobo and Grattan, but did not provide all the medical records and report that Plaintiff used to support her claim. [read post]
