Legal Opinion

Haywood v. Russell Corp.

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided May 24, 1991No. 89-1647PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Tommie L. Haywood sued her employer, Russell Corporation ("Russell"), alleging that it had interfered with her right to receive benefits under the company's group disability insurance plan (hereinafter sometimes referred to as "the plan"). Haywood sought to recover both compensatory and punitive damages based on theories of fraud and the tort of outrage. The trial court entered a summary judgment for Russell on both of Haywood's claims on the ground that they were preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), 88 Stat. 829, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq.1…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Pilot Life Insurance v. DedeauxSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  3. Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. LueckSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  5. Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. McClendonSupreme Court of the United States · 1990

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Harsch v. EisenbergCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1992
  2. Cheryl R. Zimmerman v. Sloss Equipment, Inc., S & N Enterprises, Inc., Richard SlossCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995
  3. Weems v. Jefferson-Pilot Life Ins. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1995
  4. SOUTHEASTERN MEATS OF PELHAM v. City of BirminghamSupreme Court of Alabama · 2004
  5. Ex Parte GurganusSupreme Court of Alabama · 1992

14 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