Legal Opinion
Dowling v. Pension Plan for Salaried Employees of Union Pacific Corp. & Affiliates
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided September 15, 2017No. 16-1977PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
VANASKIE, Circuit Judge.
Retirement plans can be complex documents that span hundreds of pages with numerous peculiarities. But when do a plan’s terms move from merely complex to ambiguous? That is the question in this pension plan dispute. Former Union Pacific employee John Dowling is covered by a 277-page retirement plan composed of introductory material, 19 articles of content, and various appendices—none of which explicitly address Dowling’s precise situation. When Dowling retired, the plan administrator interpreted the plan to provide Dowling with a lower monthly…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. GlennSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Conkright v. FrommertSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Fleisher v. Standard InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2012
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Leo Noga v. Fulton Financial Corp EmployeeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2021
- Bergamatto v. Bd. of Trs. of the Nysa Ila Pension FundCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2019
- Commonwealth v. PolliniKentucky Supreme Court · 2014
- Reichard v. United of Omaha Life Ins. Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2018
- Davies v. First Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2017
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.