Legal Opinion

Fulghum v. Embarq Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided February 24, 2015No. 13-3230PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MURPHY, Circuit Judge.

I. Introduction

Plaintiffs-appellants represent a class of retirees (collectively “Plaintiffs”) formerly employed by Sprint-Nextel Corporation (“Sprint”), Embarq Corporation (“Em-barq”), or a predecessor and/or subsidiary company of either Embarq or Sprint (collectively “Defendants”). Plaintiffs brought this suit after Defendants altered or eliminated health and life insurance benefits for retirees. Plaintiffs asserted Defendants (1) violated the Employee Retirement In come Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) by breaching their contractual obligation to provide vested health…

2Cases cited51 opinions

  1. Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & TrustSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  4. Garcia v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  5. Robert D. Sprague, Plaintiffs-Appellees/cross-Appellants v. General Motors Corporation, Defendant-Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998

46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Yamauchi v. CottermanDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API