564 U.S. 338 (2011) Cited 6,668 times 505 Legal Analyses
Holding in Rule 23 context that “[w]ithout some glue holding the alleged reasons for all those decisions together, it will be impossible to say that examination of all the class members' claims for relief will produce a common answer”
489 U.S. 101 (1989) Cited 8,847 times 54 Legal Analyses
Holding that a denial of ERISA benefits "is to be reviewed under a de novo standard unless the benefit plan gives the administrator or fiduciary discretionary authority to determine eligibility for benefits or to construe the terms of the plan"
530 U.S. 211 (2000) Cited 1,353 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"
530 U.S. 238 (2000) Cited 547 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that the authorization under 29 U.S.C. § 1132 "extends to a suit against a nonfiduciary 'party in interest' to a transaction barred by [29 U.S.C. § 1106]"
Invalidating "any provision in an agreement or instrument which purports to relieve a fiduciary from responsibility or liability for any responsibility, obligation or duty."
29 C.F.R. § 2510.3-102 Cited 186 times 3 Legal Analyses
Defining "assets of the plan" to include amounts "that a participant or beneficiary pays to an employer ... [or] that a participant has withheld from his wages by an employer "
29 C.F.R. § 2510.3-101 Cited 65 times 16 Legal Analyses
Providing that the underlying assets of an “operating company” in which a plan invests are not considered plan assets for determining whether a prohibited transaction occurred