Legal Opinion
Blue v. UAL Corp.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided November 10, 1998No. 97-3194PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge.
Most contemporary pensions are covered by the anti-forfeiture and anti-alienation clauses of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (erisa), 29 U.S.C. § 1056(c), (d)(1). See Guidry v. Sheet Metal Workers National Pension Fund, 493 U.S. 365, 110 S.Ct. 680, 107 L.Ed.2d 782 (1990); In re Baker, 114 F.3d 636 (7th Cir.1997). Pensions must be distributed strictly according to the terms of each plan, and state laws that permit or require payment to persons (or in amounts) other than those specified in the plan are ineffective. 29 U.S.C. § 1144(a). Even state rules…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Boggs v. BoggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Guidry v. Sheet Metal Workers National Pension FundSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- In the Matter of Jerome D. Baker, Debtor. Appeal of Lasalle Bank NiCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Matassarin v. LynchCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1999
- Trustees of the Directors Guild of America-Producer Pension Benefits Plans v. TiseCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Brown v. Continental Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2011
- United States v. WahlenDistrict Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 2006
- Wilcox v. WilliamsDistrict Court, C.D. California · 1999
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.