Skip to main content
· 1/29/2008

Deal v. Kegler Brown Hill & Ritter Co. LPA

Citations

  • 551 F. Supp. 2d 694
  • 43 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1866
  • 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6594
  • 2008 WL 269617

How courts have described this case

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

  • observing that \[t]he burden is on Defendant to show that the ... Plan is a top hat plan.\
  • “The burden is on Defendant to show that the ... Plan is a top hat plan.”
  • the court lacked information necessary to determine that the plan at issue was a top hat plan where the defendant provided inaccurate percentages
  • parties agreed that the plan was unfunded and for the purpose of providing deferred compensation, but disputed selectivity
  • the court also lacked needed information necessary to determine that the plan at issue was a top hat plan where the defendant did not provide all relevant salaries

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gregory L. Frost

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.