11 Cited authorities

Barnhart v. Sigmon Coal Co.
534 U.S. 438 (2002) Cited 838 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that where Congress has listed some categories of people as to successor liability under 26 U.S.C. § 9706, those not included in the list are not liable because Congress could have included them "clearly and explicitly"
Bay Area Laundry v. Ferbar
522 U.S. 192 (1997) Cited 625 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that a new statute of limitations starts to run with each missed payment or when payment of the debt is accelerated
Pender v. Bank of Am. Corp.
788 F.3d 354 (4th Cir. 2015) Cited 56 times
Holding that a cause of action could not be advanced under § 1132(B) when the plaintiffs sought to enforce the plan "not as written, but as it should properly be enforced under ERISA."
Holland v. Williams Mountain Coal Co.
256 F.3d 819 (D.C. Cir. 2001) Cited 28 times
Finding a successor corporation liable for its predecessor's legal claims under certain circumstances, including if the transaction amounts to a de facto merger, or the buying corporation is a “mere continuation” of the selling corporation
Holland v. Bibeau Constr. Co.
774 F.3d 8 (D.C. Cir. 2014) Cited 11 times
Explaining that the 1992 Plan Trustees filed suit after a "related person" failed to pay monthly per-beneficiary premiums for former employees of a "last signatory operator" who were receiving benefits from the 1992 Plan
Holland v. Williams Mountain Coal Co.
496 F.3d 670 (D.C. Cir. 2007) Cited 5 times
Noting that pursuing a losing claim grounded in a reasonable legal argument does not constitute bad faith
Section 1132 - Civil enforcement
29 U.S.C. § 1132 Cited 26,304 times 170 Legal Analyses
Holding liable "[a]ny administrator" who fails to provide documents in a timely manner
Section 1001 - Congressional findings and declaration of policy
29 U.S.C. § 1001 Cited 20,532 times 59 Legal Analyses
Noting that ERISA was enacted “to protect ... employee benefit plans and their beneficiaries”
Section 1145 - Delinquent contributions
29 U.S.C. § 1145 Cited 2,673 times 5 Legal Analyses
Requiring that employers contribute according to the terms of plans only "to the extent not inconsistent with law"
Section 1451 - Civil actions
29 U.S.C. § 1451 Cited 615 times 4 Legal Analyses
Stating that, "[i]n any action under this section to compel an employer to pay withdrawal liability, any failure of the employer to make any withdrawal liability payment within the time prescribed shall be treated in the same manner as a delinquent contribution"
Section 9721 - Civil enforcement
26 U.S.C. § 9721 Cited 29 times
Incorporating ERISA's enforcement scheme

Holland et al v. Consol Energy Inc.

11 Cited authorities

Holding that where Congress has listed some categories of people as to successor liability under 26 U.S.C. § 9706, those not included in the list are not liable because Congress could have included them "clearly and explicitly"

Holding that a new statute of limitations starts to run with each missed payment or when payment of the debt is accelerated

Holding that a cause of action could not be advanced under § 1132(B) when the plaintiffs sought to enforce the plan "not as written, but as it should properly be enforced under ERISA."

Finding a successor corporation liable for its predecessor's legal claims under certain circumstances, including if the transaction amounts to a de facto merger, or the buying corporation is a “mere continuation” of the selling corporation

Explaining that the 1992 Plan Trustees filed suit after a "related person" failed to pay monthly per-beneficiary premiums for former employees of a "last signatory operator" who were receiving benefits from the 1992 Plan

Noting that pursuing a losing claim grounded in a reasonable legal argument does not constitute bad faith

Holding liable "[a]ny administrator" who fails to provide documents in a timely manner

Noting that ERISA was enacted “to protect ... employee benefit plans and their beneficiaries”

Requiring that employers contribute according to the terms of plans only "to the extent not inconsistent with law"

Stating that, "[i]n any action under this section to compel an employer to pay withdrawal liability, any failure of the employer to make any withdrawal liability payment within the time prescribed shall be treated in the same manner as a delinquent contribution"

Incorporating ERISA's enforcement scheme