Legal Opinion

Scalice v. Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust Fund

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 28, 2005No. 38 WAP 2004PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Chief Justice CAPPY.

This appeal raises a question under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA” or “Act”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. Specifically, we consider whether the Superior Court correctly affirmed the trial court’s order granting summary judgment to Appellee Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust Fund (“PEBTF”) on a counterclaim for subrogation. The grant of summary judgment was premised on the threshold determination that PEBTF was not a governmental plan excluded from the Act’s coverage on October 30, 1997, see 29 U.S.C. §§ 1002(32), 1003(b)(1), but rather,…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Metropolitan Life Insurance v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. FMC Corp. v. HollidaySupreme Court of the United States · 1990
  3. Nanty-Glo Boro. v. American Surety Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1932
  4. Marks v. TasmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  5. Buffalo Township v. JonesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Commonwealth v. BaneySuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2004
  2. Wimer v. Pennsylvania Employees Benefit Trust FundSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  3. Fagan v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP. OF COM.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
  4. Barnett v. SKF USA, INC.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  5. Elizabeth Township Sanitary Authority v. MignognaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2013

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

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

Powered by the Exa API