Legal Opinion
CIGNA Corp. v. Amara
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided May 16, 2011No. 09-804PublishedCited by 717 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Breyer
In 1998, petitioner CIGNA Corporation changed the nature of its basic pension plan for employees. Previously, the plan provided a retiring employee with a defined benefit in the form of an annuity calculated on the basis of his preretirement salary and length of service. The new plan provided most retiring employees with a (lump sum) cash balance calculated on the basis of a defined annual contribution from CIGNA as increased by compound interest. Because many employees had already earned at least some old-plan benefits, the new plan translated already-earned benefits into an opening amount…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Mertens v. Hewitt AssociatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance v. KnudsonSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. SchoonejongenSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Princess Lida of Thurn and Taxis v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by717 opinions
- Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Helton v. AT & T Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2013
- Liu v. SEC. & Exch. Comm'nSupreme Court of the United States · 2020
- U.S. Airways, Inc. v. McCutchenSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Innova Hosp. San Antonio, Ltd. v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Ga., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2018
712 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.