Legal Opinion
Lillian Yanks Rehmar v. Bernard L. Smith
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 6, 1977No. 16-56297PublishedCited by 142 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WALLACE, Circuit Judge:
Lillian Rehmar (Lillian) brought this action against two pension fund trustees to recover a survivor’s benefit allegedly due her under a collectively-bargained pension plan. The district judge applied principles developed by California courts in interpreting insurance contracts and gave judgment to Lillian for $18,800 plus interest and costs. The trustees appealed claiming that the state law of commercial insurance contracts should not have been applied. We reverse and remand.
I. Facts
Sam Rehmar (Sam), a radio operator on merchant ships, worked under the terms of a…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Vaca v. SipesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills of Ala.Supreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Republic Steel Corp. v. MaddoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Smith v. Evening News Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Humphrey v. MooreSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by142 opinions
- International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace, and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (Uaw), and Local 134, Uaw v. Yard-Man, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
- Claude Wardle, Sr. v. Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension FundCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1980
- Harry Jung, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Fmc Corporation, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Daniel Kunin v. Benefit Trust Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Leroy Ellenburg, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee. v. Brockway, Inc. & Spellman Cunningham, Defendants-Appellees/cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
137 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.