Commonwealth v. Prout, B.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that upon pension plan termination participant has only a nonforfeitable claim for a pension which may be limited when plan assets are insufficient to cover all pension obligations
• cautioning that the definitions in Title I are “not necessarily applicable to Title IV”
• describing the purposes of the various Titles contained within ERISA and the allocation of administrative responsibilities for those Titles
• vesting means that “the employee’s right to the benefit would survive the termination of his employment”
• discussing Congress’ intent of “making sure that if a worker has been promised a defined pension benefit upon retirement — and if he has fulfilled whatever conditions are required to obtain a vested benefit — he actually will receive it”
• \the terms 'vested’ and ‘nonforfeitable’ were used synonymously\ throughout the entire legislative history of ERISA

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).