Coronavirus (COVID-19) News and Resources
Coronavirus (COVID-19) Webcasts
Subscribe to Free Daily Newsletters
Post a Job

Featured Jobs

Enrolled Actuary
Loren D. Stark Company logo
Loren D. Stark Company
(Telecommute)
ESOP Valuation Writer
Unique ESOP Valuation Provider
(Telecommute)

Free Daily News and Jobs

“BenefitsLink continues to be the most valuable resource we have at the firm.”

-- An attorney subscriber

Get the BenefitsLink app LinkedIn
Twitter
Facebook

<< Previous news item   |   Next news item >>



Non-Qualified Plan Litigation Reversal: Snatching Victory from the Jaws of Defeat
Winston & Strawn LLP Link to more items from this source
Jan. 15, 2014
"Many of the putative class members actually vested in and received more shares under the Retirement Award vesting schedule than they would have if they had been paid under ERISA's minimum vesting schedules. Plan participants who have already been paid benefits equal to or in excess of what they would have received under ERISA vesting have no viable cause of action in this case." [Bond v. Marriott Int'l, Inc. (D. Md. Aug. 9, 2013)]

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 link above).
An important word about authorship: BenefitsLink® is providing a hypertext link to the item shown above, but is not the author of the item (unless otherwise specified).
© 2020 BenefitsLink.com, Inc.