Legal Opinion
Harris Trust & Savings Bank v. Salomon Smith Barney Inc.
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 12, 2000No. 99-579PublishedCited by 437 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Thomas
Section 406(a) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 88 Stat. 879, bars a fiduciary of an employee benefit plan from causing the plan to engage in certain transactions with a “party in interest.” 29 U. S. C. § 1106(a). Section 502(a)(3) authorizes a “participant, beneficiary, or fiduciary” of a plan to bring a civil aetion to obtain “appropriate equitable relief” to redress violations of ERISA Title I. 29 U. S. C. § 1132(a)(3). The question is whether that authorization extends to a suit against a non-fiduciary “party in interest” to a transaction barred by § 406(a).…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Russello v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Mertens v. Hewitt AssociatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Yee v. City of EscondidoSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Hughes Aircraft Co. v. JacobsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by437 opinions
- Braden v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2009
- Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance v. KnudsonSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Pfahler v. National Latex Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
- Thole v. U. S. Bank N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2020
- Trustees of the Upstate New York Engineers Pension Fund v. Ivy Asset ManagementCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2016
432 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.