60 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 236,816 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
477 U.S. 317 (1986) Cited 216,828 times 40 Legal Analyses
Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"
Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio
475 U.S. 574 (1986) Cited 113,381 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them
Lujan v. Defs. of Wildlife
504 U.S. 555 (1992) Cited 27,995 times 138 Legal Analyses
Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"
Firestone Tire Rubber Co. v. Bruch
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"
Great-West Life Annuity Ins. Co. v. Knudson
534 U.S. 204 (2002) Cited 1,696 times 37 Legal Analyses
Holding an injunction ordering money funds to be legal relief because it sought to "impo[se] personal liability for the benefits that they conferred upon respondents"
Cigna Corp. v. Amara
563 U.S. 421 (2011) Cited 1,108 times 101 Legal Analyses
Holding that SPDs provide "communication with beneficiaries about the plan, but . . . do not themselves constitute the terms of the plan for purposes of § 502(B)"
Allis-Chalmers Corp. v. Lueck
471 U.S. 202 (1985) Cited 2,725 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that § 301 does not preempt state law claims based on non-negotiable, independent rights
Mertens v. Hewitt Assocs
508 U.S. 248 (1993) Cited 1,843 times 24 Legal Analyses
Holding that relief under section 502 is limited to remedies traditionally available in equity, such as injunctions, mandamus, and restitution
Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Russell
473 U.S. 134 (1985) Cited 2,114 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that a participant's action filed pursuant to ERISA § 502 must seek remedies that provide a "benefit [to] the plan as a whole"
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 329,613 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 1132 - Civil enforcement
29 U.S.C. § 1132 Cited 26,336 times 171 Legal Analyses
Holding liable "[a]ny administrator" who fails to provide documents in a timely manner
Section 1002 - Definitions
29 U.S.C. § 1002 Cited 11,064 times 60 Legal Analyses
Holding that ERISA is a federal law that sets standards of protection for individuals in most voluntarily established, private-sector retirement plans
Section 1109 - Liability for breach of fiduciary duty
29 U.S.C. § 1109 Cited 2,495 times 9 Legal Analyses
Breaching fiduciary "shall be subject to such other equitable or remedial relief as the court may deem appropriate"
Section 1102 - Establishment of plan
29 U.S.C. § 1102 Cited 1,623 times 12 Legal Analyses
Granting administrator, as “named fiduciary,” the “authority to control and manage the operation and administration of the plan”
Section 1022 - Summary plan description
29 U.S.C. § 1022 Cited 1,276 times 16 Legal Analyses
Requiring the summary plan description to be furnished to participants
Section 1053 - Minimum vesting standards
29 U.S.C. § 1053 Cited 613 times 1 Legal Analyses
Requiring that participants in a defined benefit plan acquire a nonforfeitable right to 100% of their accrued benefits after no more than seven years of service
Section 411 - Minimum vesting standards
26 U.S.C. § 411 Cited 487 times 10 Legal Analyses
Defining "accrued benefit"
Section 2560.503-1 - Claims procedure
29 C.F.R. § 2560.503-1 Cited 2,828 times 77 Legal Analyses
Adopting the requirements of 29 C.F.R. § 2560.503-1

Norris v. Mazzola et al

60 Cited authorities

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

Holding that, on summary judgment, antitrust plaintiffs "must show that the inference of conspiracy is reasonable in light of the competing inferences of independent action or collusive action that could not have harmed" them

Holding that the elements of standing "must be supported in the same way as any other matter on which the plaintiff bears the burden of proof"

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"

Holding an injunction ordering money funds to be legal relief because it sought to "impo[se] personal liability for the benefits that they conferred upon respondents"

Holding that SPDs provide "communication with beneficiaries about the plan, but . . . do not themselves constitute the terms of the plan for purposes of § 502(B)"

Holding that § 301 does not preempt state law claims based on non-negotiable, independent rights

Holding that relief under section 502 is limited to remedies traditionally available in equity, such as injunctions, mandamus, and restitution

Holding that a participant's action filed pursuant to ERISA § 502 must seek remedies that provide a "benefit [to] the plan as a whole"

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

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

Holding that ERISA is a federal law that sets standards of protection for individuals in most voluntarily established, private-sector retirement plans

Breaching fiduciary "shall be subject to such other equitable or remedial relief as the court may deem appropriate"

Granting administrator, as “named fiduciary,” the “authority to control and manage the operation and administration of the plan”

Requiring the summary plan description to be furnished to participants

Requiring that participants in a defined benefit plan acquire a nonforfeitable right to 100% of their accrued benefits after no more than seven years of service

Defining "accrued benefit"

Adopting the requirements of 29 C.F.R. § 2560.503-1