Legal Opinion
Call v. Sumitomo Bank of California
District Court, N.D. California
Decided June 28, 1988No. C-87-2271 EFLPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
LYNCH, District Judge.
Plaintiffs brought this action under the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), seeking recovery individually and on behalf of two ERISA-regulated Profit Sharing Plans. The case is presently before the Court on defendants’ motion to dismiss. For the reasons explained below, this Court grants the motion.
FACTS
According to plaintiffs’ complaint, the facts are as follows. In December 1980, the Administrative Committees of the Phase II Corporation Restated Profit Sharing Plan and the California Etching Corporation Restated Profit Sharing…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Transport Workers UnionSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Raymond J. Donovan, Secretary of Labor v. Loran W. Robbins, and Allen M. DorfmanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- Bernice Sokol v. Jacob L. Bernstein, M.D.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Kim v. FujikawaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Call v. Sumitomo Bank of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Bartz v. CarterDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1989
- Daniels v. BurseyDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2004
- Call v. Sumitomo Bank of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.