Legal Opinion

Call v. Sumitomo Bank of California

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided July 26, 1989No. 88-15076PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

881 F.2d 626

11 Employee Benefits Ca 1273

Sterling CALL, Ralph Robinson and Edison Willers, as

individuals; Sterling Call and Ralph Robinson as Plan

Administrators of the Phase II Corporation Restated Profit

Sharing Plan; and Sterling Call, Kenneth Friedman and

Edison Willers as Plan Administrators of the California

Etching Corporation Restated Profit Sharing Plan,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

v.

SUMITOMO BANK OF CALIFORNIA, a California corporation, Ray

W. Sherman, Jr., an individual, Khateeb A. Lateef,

an individual, and Lateef Management

Associates, a partnership,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 88-15076.

United…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
  4. Pilot Life Insurance v. DedeauxSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  5. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Brown v. California Law Enforcement Ass'nDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2015
  2. Chemung Canal Trust Co. ex rel. Fairway Spring Co. v. Sovran Bank/MarylandDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1990
  3. Miller v. Northwestern National Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API