Legal Opinion
DeFazio v. Hollister, Inc.
District Court, E.D. California
Decided April 6, 2012No. Nos. CIV. 2:04-1358 WBS GGH, 2:05-0559 WBS GGH, 2:05-1726 WBS GGHPublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge.
After conducting a fifteen-day bench trial and providing the parties with extended time to submit post-trial briefing, the court finds in favor of all defendants on all of plaintiffs’ claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461. This memorandum constitutes the court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a).
I. Factual and Procedural Background
Defendant Hollister, Inc. (“Hollister”) is a privately-held Illinois corporation that develops,…
2Cases cited69 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Farrar v. HobbySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Mertens v. Hewitt AssociatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Pegram v. HerdrichSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Moyle v. Liberty Mutual Retirement Benefit PlanDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2017
- Brooks v. Tarsadia HotelsDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2019
- Budorick v. BudorickDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2019
- Estate of Kirk Anthony Foster v. American Marine SVS Group Benefit PlanDistrict Court, D. Montana · 2019
- Serafin v. William C. Earhart Company Inc.District Court, D. Oregon · 2020