Featured Jobs
|
The Pension Source
|
|
Distributions Processor - Qualified Retirement Plans Anchor 3(16) Fiduciary Solutions, LLC
|
|
DWC ERISA Consultants LLC
|
|
Nova 401(k) Associates
|
|
BPAS
|
|
EPIC RPS
|
|
BPAS
|
|
Merkley Retirement Consultants
|
|
Compensation Strategies Group, Ltd.
|
|
Defined Benefit Specialist II or III Nova 401(k) Associates
|
|
Retirement Combo Plan Administrator Heritage Pension Advisors, Inc.
|
|
July Business Services
|
Free Newsletters
“BenefitsLink continues to be the most valuable resource we have at the firm.”
-- An attorney subscriber
|
|
Search the News Archive
|
4 Matching News Items |
| 1. |
U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit via FindLaw
Mar. 12, 2003
"A plan administrator was not acting as a fiduciary in amending a severance plan, and employers have the right to amend or end a welfare benefit plan at any time, thus amendment to a Separation Pay Plan was proper under ERISA, and an elimination of an expected (not accrued) benefit was not a violation." [Campbell v. BANKBOSTON, No. 02-1695 (1st Cir. Mar. 7, 2003)]
|
| 2. |
U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit via FindLaw
May 12, 2003
Excerpt: A beneficiary of a pension plan can not intentionally evade receipt of his benefits and then force the pension plan to pay him interest on the forgone benefits, because there is no obligation to pay interest in such a situation. [Twomey v. Delta Airlines Pilots Pension Plan, Nos. 02-1968, 02-2271 (1st Cir. May 7, 2003)]
|
| 3. |
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit via FindLaw
July 23, 2002
Nord v. The Black & Decker Disability Plan, No. 00-55689 (9th Cir. Jul. 15, 2002). Excerpt: First, we must determine whether the affected beneficiary has provided material, probative evidence, beyond the mere fact of the apparent conflict, tending to show that the fiduciary's self-interest caused a breach ... [I]f the beneficiary has made the required showing, the principles of trust law require us to act very skeptically in deferring to the discretion of an administrator who appears to have committed a breach ...
|
| 4. |
U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit via FindLaw
Mar. 3, 2001
Gary B. Mauser v. Raytheon Company Pension Plan for Salaried Employees, Nos. 99-1895, 99-1896 (1st Cir. Feb. 2, 2001). Excerpt: Because we have already established an avenue for relief for reliance on an inadequate Plan Summary, we hold there is not a more general equitable estoppel claim based solely on an inadequate Plan Summary. We leave for an appropriate case whether there may exist an equitable estoppel claim in cases where misrepresentations exist apart from the Plan Summary.
|
|
Syntax Enhancements for Standard Searches
|