Ello v. Singh

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that section 510 “was designed primarily to prevent unscrupulous employers from discharging or harassing their employees in order to keep them from obtaining vested pension rights” (quoting Dister v. Continental Group, Inc., 859 F.2d 1108, 1111 (2d Cir. 1988)
• dismissing as untimely claim that decision to retain fund administrator was a breach of fiduciary duty
• analyzing requests to seal certain submissions related to non-summary judgment motion only in light of the common law right of access
• denying as futile amending the complaint to add defamation claim where “[p]laintiff fails to identify to whom [the] statements were made, or the time and manner in which they were made”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).