Legal Opinion
Central Pennsylvania Teamster's Pension Fund v. Service Group, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided March 28, 1985No. Civ. A. 84-2469PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
HUYETT, District Judge.
Plaintiffs in this case are the Central Pennsylvania Teamsters Pension Fund and its trustees (“the Plan”). The Plan is a multi-employer pension plan governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) as amended by the MultiEmployer Pension Plan Act Amendments (“MPPAA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1381-1453. This lawsuit arises from a determination made by the Plan’s trustees that defendant Service Group Inc. (“SGI”) had withdrawn from the Plan as that term is defined in MPPAA. See 29 U.S.C. § 1383(a). SGI denies that it is an “employer” responsible…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Combs v. IndykDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1982
- Bennett v. MacHined Metals Co., Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1984
- Dorn's Transportation, Inc. v. Teamsters Pension Trust Fund & VicinityDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1984
- Miami Valley Carpenters District Council Health & Welfare Fund v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1984
3Cited by17 opinions
- Flying Tiger Line v. Teamsters Pension Trust FundCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
- The Flying Tiger Line, a Delaware Corporation, Tiger International, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Warren Transport, Inc., an Iowa Corporation, & Counterdefendants v. Teamsters Pension Trust Fund of Philadelphia and Vicinity, A/K/A Teamsters Pension Plan of Philadelphia and Vicinity, and Charles J. Schaffer, Jr., Counterplaintiffs v. Central States, Southwest and Southeast Areas Pension Fund, a Multiemployer Pension Plan, Teamsters Pension Trust Fund of Philadelphia and Vicinity, a Multiemployer Pension Plan, Western Pennsylvania Teamsters and Employers Pension Fund, a Multiemployer Pension Plan, Teamsters Local 641 Pension Fund, a Multiemployer Pension Plan, and Central Pennsylvania Teamsters Pension Fund, a Multiemployer Pension Plan, Each Sued Individually and as a Member of a Class of Similarly Situated Multiemployer Pension Plans Who Assert Withdrawal Liability, Against Hall's Motor Transit Company, Under the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1980. Appeal of the Flying Tiger Line, Inc., Tiger International Inc. And Warren Transport, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
- In Re Consolidated Litigation Concerning International Harvester's Disposition of Wisconsin SteelDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1988
- Transpersonnel, Inc. v. Roadway Express, Inc., a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2005
- Canario v. Lidelco, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1992
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.