Eisenrich v. Minneapolis Retail Meat Cutters & Food Handlers Pension Plan

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that section 1053 prohibits plans from suspending retirees’ vested benefits
• finding that where both party’s positions were “relatively evenly balanced,” the relative merits factor does not weigh heavily in favor of the prevailing employee
• holding district court erred in relying heavily on an erroneous finding of bad faith
• involving benefits suspension provisions aimed at preventing “double dipping” during retirement from a covered position while also collecting wages from reemployment in covered employment
• Counsel separately noted that Hayes’s retiree health coverage was also “cancellable due to work in prohibited employment,” but directed Hayes’s counsel to the Health Plan’s trustees to address this issue. Id.
• affirming grant of request for sua sponte summary judgment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).