Legal Opinion
Barnes v. AT & T Pension Benefit Plannonbargained Program
District Court, N.D. California
Decided March 1, 2011No. CV 08-04058 MHPPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Re: Motion to Modify the Court’s Class Certification Order; Motion to Amend the Complaint.
MARILYN HALL PATEL, District Judge.
In this action, plaintiff Quiller Barnes (“Barnes”), on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, alleges that defendant *564AT & T Pension Benefit Plan-Nonbargained Program (“AT & T”) wrongfully denied him pension benefits to which he was entitled. Barnes’ amended complaint asserts three causes of action under the Employee Retirement and Income Security Act (“ERISA”) for: (1) failing to provide adequate notice of the reasons for benefit denial,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Amchem Products, Inc. v. WindsorSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Eminence Capital, Llc, and Jay Spechler v. Aspeon, Inc. Richard P. StackCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Christopher Owens Cynthia Hutchins,plaintiffs-Appellants v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan,inc., a California Corporation,defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Morongo Band of Mission Indians, Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant/appellant v. Frank Rose Clive "Sonny" Miller, Defendants-Counter-Plaintiffs/appelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Nitsch v. DreamWorks Animation SKG Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2016
- Pedersen v. Kinder Morgan, Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2024