Loan & Distribution Specialist AimPoint Pension
|
Compass
|
Regional Vice President of Sales The Retirement Plan Company
|
Defined Benefit Combo Cash Balance Compliance Consultant Loren D. Stark Company (LDSCO)
|
Bates & Company, Inc.
|
AimPoint Pension
|
“BenefitsLink continues to be the most valuable resource we have at the firm.”
-- An attorney subscriber
1st Circuit Says Intent Required in ERISA Retaliatory Discharge Case
Workplace Prof Blog [Guidance Overview] Aug. 11, 2008
Excerpt: Kouvchinov sued the employer for violation of ERISA alleging retaliatory discharge, and for tortiously interfering with an advantageous business relationship. The trial court granted the employer's motion for summary judgment. The 1st Circuit affirmed. Kouvchinov argued that proof of the employer's specific intent to interfere with his ERISA benefits was not required in retaliatory discharge cases as compared to preemptive discrimination cases. The court rejected Kouvchinov's argument because, without the specific intent requirement, every discharged employee who had exercised his right to benefits would have a potential claim against the employer.
|
Please click here to report this link if it is broken (for example, if you see a "404 File Not Found" error message after you click on the linked news item's title). |
An important word about authorship: BenefitsLink® created this link to the news item, but we are not the news item's author (unless expressly shown above). |