Clarence E. Lockhart v. United Mine Workers of America 1974 Pension Trust Paul R. Dean Michael H. Holland Marty D. Hudson Elliott A. Segal, Trustees

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• If the denial of benefits is contrary to the clear language of the plan, the decision will constitute an abuse of discretion.
• If the denial of benefits is contrary to the clear language of the plan, the decision will constitute an abuse of discretion.
• \The award of benefits under any ERISA plan is governed in the first instance by the language of the plan itself.\
• “[t]he award of benefits under any ERISA plan is governed in the first instance by the language of the plan itself”
• “[Plaintiffs’] suit under the MMPA is an action arising under a law providing for embargoes. As such, it is reserved to the exclusive jurisdiction of the CIT.”
• “[Plaintiffs’] suit under the MMPA is an action arising under a law providing for embargoes. As such, it is reserved to the exclusive jurisdiction of the CIT.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).