Legal Opinion
James v. International Painters & Allied Trades Industry Pension Plan
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided December 20, 2013No. 19-5298PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion for the Court filed PER CURIAM.
2Per curiam
Appellant Ian Phillip James asserts that the International Painters and Allied Trades Industry Pension Plan (“International Plan”) has denied him benefits to which he is entitled. The key factual issue is whether James accrued enough credit under an earlier plan, the Local 963 Plan, which was later merged into the International Plan. In light of certain concessions, the only time period at issue is between 1959 and 1962. Relevant contemporaneous records regarding this period are sparse. The International Plan determined that James had not demonstrated…
3Cases cited8 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Conkright v. FrommertSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- LaAsmar v. Phelps Dodge Corp. Life, Accidental Death & Dismemberment & Dependent Life Insurance PlanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2010
- Anderson v. Suburban Teamsters of Northern Illinois Pension Fund Board of TrusteesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Atkins v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement PlanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2012
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by6 opinions
- Abraha v. Colonial Parking, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2017
- Joel S. v. CignaDistrict Court, D. Utah · 2018
- Balkin v. UNUM Life Company of AmericaDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2024
- Chipman v. Cigna Behavioral Health, Inc.District Court, District of Columbia · 2020
- Hamburger v. Cvs CaremarkDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2026
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.