Skip to main content
Fifth Circuit· 11/22/2005

Mello v. Sara Lee Corp.

Citations

  • 431 F.3d 440
  • 2005 WL 3112942

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that an employee did not reasonably rely on oral representations and informai benefits statements which contradicted the clear and unambiguous terms of an ERISA plan
  • noting “the clear and consistent case law forbidding recognizing reasonable reliance on informal documents in the face of unambiguous Plan terms”
  • “Mello’s claim cannot surmount the clear and consistent case law forbidding recognizing reasonable reliance on informal documents in the face of unambiguous Plan terms.”
  • “To establish an ERISA-estoppel claim, the plaintiff must establish: (1) a material misrepresentation; (2) reasonable and detrimental - 5 - reliance upon the representation; and (3) extraordinary circumstances.”
  • “This circuit has yet to explicitly adopt ERISA-estoppel as a cognizable legal theory. . . . We now join other circuits in explicitly adopting ERISA-estoppel as a cognizable theory.”
  • \explicitly adopting ERISA-estoppel as a cognizable theory\ in a pension case

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Garwood, Smith, Clement

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

26 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Mello v. Sara Lee Corp.

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

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.