Legal Opinion
Hockett v. Sun Company, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided March 24, 1997No. 95-5252, 95-5255PublishedCited by 55 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
STEPHEN H. ANDERSON, Circuit Judge.
Less than two months after Plaintiff Paul E. Hockett retired from his career with Sun Refining and Marketing Company (“Sun R & M”), Sun R & M’s parent corporation, Sun Company, Inc., announced a new early retirement plan that would have benefited him had he delayed his retirement. Hockett sued Defendants Sun Company, Inc., and the Sun Company, Inc, Retirement Plan, alleging breach of fiduciary duty under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1009 et seq., wrongful denial of his request for participation in the new retirement…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. DardenSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Vartanian v. Monsanto CompanyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994
- Anthony J. Pocchia v. Nynex Corporation and Nynex Service CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- Martinez v. Schlumberger, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2003
- In Re Enron Corp. Securities, Derivative & ERISADistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2003
- Mathews v. Chevron Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Terry Neustrom v. Union Pacific Railroad Company, Defendant-Third-Party v. Asplundh Tree Expert Company, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1998
- Ernest S. Bins v. Exxon Company U.S.A., a Division of Exxon Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.