Legal Opinion
Schoonejongen v. Curtiss-Wright Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided April 29, 1998No. 97-5497UnknownCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
SEITZ, Circuit Judge.
The sole but important issue in this appeal, which stems from an action alleging a violation of section 402(b)(3) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. . § 1102(b)(3) (“ERISA”), has already been framed for us by the Supreme Court in its mandate to our court on remand. 1 In particular, we will address the question directly posed by the Supreme Court: “[Wjhether Curtiss-Wright’s valid amendment procedure — amendment ‘by the company’ — was complied with in this case.” Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. Schoonejongen, 514 U.S. 73, 85, 115…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Williams v. Borough of West ChesterCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
- Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. SchoonejongenSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Hozier v. Midwest Fasteners, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- 21 Employee Benefits Cas. 1073, Pens. Plan Guide (Cch) P 23942h Frank C. Schoonejongen Wesley L. Losson John S. Dunning William Martone William v. Hanzalek Edward F. Ziek Melvin Deblock Joseph Colquhoun Joseph Majerscak Gerard Abbamont and Olga Wolsey, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Curtiss-Wright CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1998
- GENESIS AGGREGATES B v. TOLL SOUTHWESTUtah Supreme Court · 2025
- State v. WilcoxUtah Supreme Court · 2025
- ARGEN v. KATZDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2023
- BLUM v. POSITIVE PHYSICIANS INSURANCE COMPANYDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2024
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.