Legal Opinion
CUMMINGS BY TECHMEIER v. Briggs & Stratton Ret.
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Decided April 19, 1985No. Civ. A. 83-C-722PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER
REYNOLDS, Chief Judge.
This is an action for benefits and statutory penalties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. Federal jurisdiction is based on 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
The complaint contains two counts. First, plaintiffs contend that benefits are payable and owing to Barbara Jean Cummings by virtue of her status as beneficiary of the Briggs & Stratton Retirement Plan. Second, plaintiffs contend that the defendants failed to comply with a request for information, in violation of 29 U.S.C. §§ 1025(a) and 1132(c). Presently…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Free v. BlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Simonds v. SimondsNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Freund v. Marshall & Ilsley BankDistrict Court, W.D. Wisconsin · 1979
- Richards v. RichardsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1973
- Hillis v. Waukesha Title Co., Inc.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Cummings v. Briggs & Stratton Retirement PlanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1986
- Cummings v. Briggs & Stratton Retirement PlanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1986
- Airco Industrial Gases v. Teamsters Health & Welfare Pension FundDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1985
- Rollins v. Metropolitan Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1988
- Cobell v. NortonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2003
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.