40 Cited authorities

Pegram v. Herdrich
530 U.S. 211 (2000) Cited 1,351 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that there was "jurisdiction regardless of the correctness of the removal" because the "amended complaint alleged ERISA violations, over which the federal courts have jurisdiction"
Faber v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
648 F.3d 98 (2d Cir. 2011) Cited 1,031 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding the insurance company discharged its fiduciary duty when it established the retained asset account in accordance with the insurance policy
Lewis v. City of Chi.
560 U.S. 205 (2010) Cited 235 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding Evans and its progeny "establish only that a Title VII plaintiff must show a present violation within the limitations period"
United Elec. Wkrs. v. 163 Pleasant St. Corp.
960 F.2d 1080 (1st Cir. 1992) Cited 686 times
Holding that the Scottish company's contempt did not forfeit its right to appeal based on its "good-faith challenges" to the U.S. district court's jurisdiction over it
Fallick v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company
162 F.3d 410 (6th Cir. 1998) Cited 421 times
Holding that, "once the district court correctly determined that Fallick had standing to bring suit under ERISA against Nationwide with respect to its application of reasonable and customary limitations to its determination of medical benefits - a methodology which, by Nationwide's own admission, it employs in all the benefits plans which Fallick wishes to include under the aegis of the proposed class - the court should then have analyzed whether Fallick satisfied the criteria of Rule 23 with respect to the absent class members"
Salmi v. Secretary of Health Human Services
774 F.2d 685 (6th Cir. 1985) Cited 535 times
Holding that prior published opinions of this Court remain binding on future panels "unless an inconsistent decision of the United States Supreme Court requires modification of the decision or this Court sitting en banc overrules the prior decision"
DM Research, Inc. v. Coll. of Am. Pathologists
170 F.3d 53 (1st Cir. 1999) Cited 247 times
Holding that discovery was not warranted at the motion to dismiss stage
Novella v. Westchester County
661 F.3d 128 (2d Cir. 2011) Cited 170 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that limitations period begins to run “when there is enough information available to the pensioner to assure that he knows or reasonably should know of the miscalculation,” and explaining its view that its standard is consistent with the Third Circuit's reasoning in Miller
Plumbers' Union v. Nomura Asset Acceptance
632 F.3d 762 (1st Cir. 2011) Cited 162 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that investment ratings were opinions about the value and prospects of certificates, not statements of fact
David v. Alphin
704 F.3d 327 (4th Cir. 2013) Cited 138 times 15 Legal Analyses
Holding that a statutory violation alone is not enough
Rule 8 - General Rules of Pleading
Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 Cited 156,250 times 193 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."
Rule 23 - Class Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Cited 34,939 times 1234 Legal Analyses
Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"
Section 2000e-2 - Unlawful employment practices
42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2 Cited 28,283 times 170 Legal Analyses
Adopting case law prior to June 4, 1989, “with respect to the concept of ‘alternative employment practice’ ”
Section 1113 - Limitation of actions
29 U.S.C. § 1113 Cited 1,043 times 43 Legal Analyses
Recognizing a six year limitations period in instances of fraud or concealment

Kelley et al v. Fidelity Management and Trust Company et al

40 Cited authorities

Holding that there was "jurisdiction regardless of the correctness of the removal" because the "amended complaint alleged ERISA violations, over which the federal courts have jurisdiction"

Holding the insurance company discharged its fiduciary duty when it established the retained asset account in accordance with the insurance policy

Holding Evans and its progeny "establish only that a Title VII plaintiff must show a present violation within the limitations period"

Holding that the Scottish company's contempt did not forfeit its right to appeal based on its "good-faith challenges" to the U.S. district court's jurisdiction over it

Holding that prior published opinions of this Court remain binding on future panels "unless an inconsistent decision of the United States Supreme Court requires modification of the decision or this Court sitting en banc overrules the prior decision"

Holding that discovery was not warranted at the motion to dismiss stage

Holding that limitations period begins to run “when there is enough information available to the pensioner to assure that he knows or reasonably should know of the miscalculation,” and explaining its view that its standard is consistent with the Third Circuit's reasoning in Miller

Holding that investment ratings were opinions about the value and prospects of certificates, not statements of fact

Holding that a statutory violation alone is not enough

Holding that "[e]very defense to a claim for relief in any pleading must be asserted in the responsive pleading. . . ."

Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"

Adopting case law prior to June 4, 1989, “with respect to the concept of ‘alternative employment practice’ ”

Recognizing a six year limitations period in instances of fraud or concealment