Legal Opinion
Elser v. I. A. M. National Pension Fund
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided August 20, 1982No. Nos. 80-6095, 81-5024PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JAMESON, Senior District Judge:
Defendant-appellant, I. A. M. National Pension Fund, has appealed from a judgment holding that the Fund’s cancellation provisions are arbitrary and capricious and that plaintiffs-appellees, Madge H. Elser and Margaret C. Thomas, and others similarly situated, were improperly denied pensions.
I. Factual Background
The Fund operates a multiemployer pension plan structured in accordance with the requirements of Section 302(c)(5) of the Labor-Management Relations Act (LMRA), 29 U.S.C. § 186(c)(5), and as defined in Section 3(37) of the Employee Retirement Income…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- National Labor Relations Board v. Amax Coal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Arroyo v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- United Mine Workers of America Health & Retirement Funds v. RobinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Fentron Industries, Inc. v. The National Shopmen Pension FundCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Lillian Yanks Rehmar v. Bernard L. SmithCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Bernice Sokol v. Jacob L. Bernstein, M.D.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Struble v. New Jersey Brewery Employees' Welfare Trust FundCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
- George Stewart v. National Shopmen Pension FundCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1984
- Horan v. Kaiser Steel Retirement PlanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1991
- Therese Johnson and David Johnson, Her Husband v. District 2 Marine Engineers Beneficial Association--Associated Maritime Officers, Medical PlanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.