Legal Opinion
Mead v. Arthur Andersen, LLP
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided March 19, 2004No. 04 Civ. 484(VM)PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER
MARRERO, District Judge.
The plaintiff brings this lawsuit under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. (“ERISA”) to recover certain benefits which his former employer allegedly owes him. The employer moves this Court to dismiss two of the three ERISA-based causes of action - one for breach of fiduciary duty and the other seeking equitable relief - as inapplicable to the ordinary individual benefits controversy described in complaint. The motion is granted.
I. BACKGROUND
Michael Mead (“Mead”), pro se, brings three ERISA-based causes of…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance v. KnudsonSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Earl Lee and David Abramson v. Richard Burkhart and Patrick Sullivan, Connecticut General Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- Helen Dunnigan, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Metropolitan Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Harrison v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
- Pelosi v. Schwab Capital Markets, L.P.District Court, S.D. New York · 2006
- Babino v. GesualdiDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2017
- Chapro v. SSR Realty Advisors, Inc. Severance PlanDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2004
- Klecher v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2004
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.