Legal Opinion

Matlock v. PITNEY-BOWES, INC.

District Court, M.D. North Carolina

Decided September 14, 2011No. 1:08-cv-696Published

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM ORDER

THOMAS D. SCHROEDER, District Judge.

This is an action for retirement benefits pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1101 et seq. (“ERISA”), in which the court previously granted summary judgment to Defendants Pitney Bowes Inc. 1 (“Pitney Bowes”) and Pitney Bowes Inc. Employee Benefits Committee (“Benefits Committee”). Matlock v. Pitney-Bowes, Inc., 751 F.Supp.2d 823 (M.D.N.C.2010). Defendants now move for costs and attorneys’ fees (Doc. 27), and Plaintiffs oppose the motion (Doc. 32). For the reasons set forth herein, the motion for costs…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Hardt v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2010
  2. Iron Workers Local 272 v. BowenCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
  3. Nachwalter v. ChristieCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1986
  4. Teague v. BakkerCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1994
  5. Williams v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2010

6 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