Legal Opinion
Jim Voyk Paul Kerrigan James L. Bellessa, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided December 1, 1999No. 98-3937PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WELLFORD, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiffs, retired officers and employees of defendant Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers (“BLE”), sued the union claiming that it unlawfully failed to pay the plaintiffs promised retirement benefits and asserting four different bases for recovery: (1) promissory estoppel; (2) breach of agreement; (3) breach of fiduciary duty; and (4) the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. Both sides in this controversy moved for summary judgment in the district court, which ruled initially for defendant on claims (3) and (4)…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Robert D. Sprague, Plaintiffs-Appellees/cross-Appellants v. General Motors Corporation, Defendant-Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
- LOCKHEED CORP. Et Al. v. SPINKSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Donovan v. DillinghamCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1982
- Robert L. Musto v. American General CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Hartline v. Sheet Metal Workers' National Pension FundDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2000
- James B. Ross v. Rail Car America Group Disability Income Plan the Canada Life Assurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2002
- Gard v. BlankenburgCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2002
- National Management Ass'n v. Transamerica Financial Resources, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2002
- White v. MartinDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2003
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.