Legal Opinion
Mertens v. Hewitt Associates
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided June 1, 1993No. 91-1671PublishedCited by 1,562 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Scalia
The question presented is whether a nonfiduciary who knowingly participates in the breach of a fiduciary duty imposed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 88 Stat. 832, as amended, 29 U. S. C. §1001 *250et seq., is liable for losses that an employee benefit plan suffers as a result of the breach.
I
According to the complaint, the allegations of which we take as true, petitioners represent a class of former employees of the Kaiser Steel Corporation (Kaiser) who participated in the Kaiser Steel Retirement Plan, a qualified pension plan under ERISA. Respondent was the plan’s…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Pilot Life Insurance v. DedeauxSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1,562 opinions
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Central Bank of Denver, N. A. v. First Interstate Bank of Denver, N. A.Supreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance v. KnudsonSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Sergio Ramirez v. County of San BernardinoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2015
- Hughes Aircraft Co. v. JacobsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
1,557 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.