Legal Opinion
Holland v. Arch Coal, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided September 28, 2018No. Civil Action No. 17-cv-300 (DLF)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DABNEY L. FRIEDRICH, United States District Judge
The Trustees of the United Mine Workers of America 1992 Benefit Plan (1992 Plan) bring this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), as amended , 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq. , to compel defendant Arch Coal, Inc. to post security pursuant to the Coal Industry Retiree Health Benefit Act of 1992 (Coal Act), as amended , 26 U.S.C. §§ 9701 et seq. The defendant argues that the Coal Act does not require it to post security and that, in any event, the 1992 Plan already has security from another source in excess of what…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Mertens v. Hewitt AssociatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Holcomb, Christine v. Powell, DonaldCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2006
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Michael Holland v. Westmoreland Coal CompanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2020
- Michael Holland v. Arch Coal, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2020
- Holland v. Consol Energy Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2022