Legal Opinion

United Mine Workers v. Pittston Co.

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided January 31, 1992No. Multidistrict Litigation No. 886; Civ. A. Nos. 88-969, 88-3716, 89-2833 and 91-3241; Misc. No. 91-386PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

THOMAS F. HOGAN, District Judge.

Before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment in Civil Action Nos. 88-969 (Pittston), 88-3716 (Pittsburg & Midway (P & M)), 89-2833 (Pierce), and Civil Action No. 91-3241 (Rawl).1 The three *660cases brought by the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) Pension and Benefit Trusts (the Pittston, P & M, and Rawl cases) are actions to collect delinquent contributions and are brought pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq. (ERISA) and § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act,…

2Cases cited40 opinions

Allen v. McCurrySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
Allied Chemical & Alkali Workers of America, Local Union No. 1 v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
Nolde Bros., Inc. v. Local No. 358, Bakery & Confectionery Workers UnionSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

In Re UMWA Employee Ben. Plans LitigationDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1992