Perl v. Laux/Arnold, Inc.
District Court, N.D. Indiana
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
JON E. DEGUILIO, District Judge.
Now before the Court are dispositive motions by both sides: Defendants seek dismissal of the complaint [DE 14] and the first amended complaint [DE 33], while Plaintiffs ask that the case be remanded back to the Allen Superior Court [DE 19]. As of October 24, 2011, both motions are fully briefed and ripe for adjudication [DE 15, 20, 30, 32, 35, 36, 37]. For the reasons detailed below, the Court holds that none of the claims in the original or first amended complaints fall “within the scope of Section 502(a)” of the Employee Retirement…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Avco Corp. v. Aero Lodge No. 735, International Ass'n of MacHinists & Aerospace WorkersSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Carol B. Oshana v. Coca-Cola Company, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2006
- LaRue v. DeWolff, Boberg & Associates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2008
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ctr. for Wildlife Ethics, Inc. v. ClarkDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 2018