Legal Opinion

Senick v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided September 9, 2016No. Civil Action No. 2015-0037Published

1Opinion of the Court

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ____________________________________ ) DAVID SENICK, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 15-cv-0037-ABJ ) PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY ) CORPORATION, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has brought suit against the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) to challenge the final decision of the Appeals Board with regard to his pension benefits. PBGC asserts that plaintiff is not entitled to the additional benefits he seeks and has moved to dismiss under…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  3. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. VolpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Burlington Truck Lines, Inc. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  5. Camp v. PittsSupreme Court of the United States · 1973

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

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API