Legal Opinion
Connors v. Incoal Inc.
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided January 15, 1992No. Civ. A. No. 86-3162PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JOHN H. PRATT, District Judge.
Before the Court are cross motions for summary judgment. Because there is no genuine issue of material fact and some of the moving parties are entitled to judgment as a matter of law, summary judgment is appropriate. For the reasons that follow, plaintiffs’ motion is granted in part and denied in part, defendant Kite Coal Sales, Inc.’s motion is denied, and defendant Double A Farms’ motion is granted.
Background
This is an action to collect withdrawal liability under the Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), as amended by…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Commissioner v. GroetzingerSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation v. Yahn & McDonnell, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Board of Trustees of the Western Conference of Teamsters Pension Trust Fund v. Stanley L. Lafrenz Anita LafrenzCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- Robert P. Groetzinger v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- United Food and Commercial Workers Union v. Progressive SupermarketsDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1986
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Joseph P. Connors, Sr. v. Incoal, Inc., A/K/A Incoal Coal Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1993
- Joseph P. Connors, Sr. v. Incoal, Inc., A/K/A Incoal Coal Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1993
- THE UFCW LOCAL 152 RETAIL MEAT PENSION FUND v. VIN-INCO ENTERPRISES, INC.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2025