Legal Opinion
Gard v. Blankenburg
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided February 21, 2002No. Nos. 00-1234, 00-2224PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GUY, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiff, Paul Gard, a trustee of a multiemployer defined benefit pension plan (DB Plan), appeals several of the district court’s determinations concerning his claims against the former trustees of the DB Plan for violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1101-14. Specifically, the district court found, after a bench trial, that the former trustees violated their fiduciary duty by adopting a 100% joint and survivor benefit option and a 90-hour break-in-service “cure” for inactive participants. On reconsideration, however, the district…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Hughes Aircraft Co. v. JacobsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. SchoonejongenSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- LOCKHEED CORP. Et Al. v. SPINKSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Terry Smith v. Ameritech Ameritech Publishing, Inc. Sickness and Accident Disability Benefit Plan Long Term Disability PlanCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1997
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Mikolajczyk v. Broadspire Services, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2007
- Schumacher v. AK Steel Corp. Ret. Acc. Pension PlanDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2014
- Brantley v. PEPSI BOTTLING GROUP, INC.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 2010
- Klein v. Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Health & Welfare PlanDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2009
- Hill v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of MichiganDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2003
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.