Legal Opinion
Boyd v. Bell
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided May 24, 2011No. Civil JFM-10-0360PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
J. FREDERICK MOTZ, District Judge.
Plaintiff Brent Boyd (“Boyd”) has brought this action against Defendant Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan (“the Plan”), which is governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B), Boyd seeks judicial review of the Plan’s refusal to reclassify his disability benefits. The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment. The issues have been fully briefed, and no hearing is necessary. See Local Rule 105.6. Defendant’s Motion for Summary…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. GlennSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Lawlor v. National Screen Service Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
- Khoury v. MeserveDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2003
- Khoury v. MeserveCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2004
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Giles v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement PlanDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2012
- Cloud v. The Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement PlanDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2022
- Dimry v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement PlanDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2020
- Royal v. National Football League Management CouncilDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2020