· 2/3/2012
Myla Nauman v. Abbott Laboratories
Citations
- 669 F.3d 854
- 52 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1163
- 2012 WL 348498
- 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 2086
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- plaintiffs claiming violation of § 1140 “must demonstrate that their employers [acted] with the specific intent of preventing or retaliating for the use of benefits.”
- plaintiffs claiming violation of § 1140 “must demonstrate that their employers [acted] with the specific intent of preventing or retaliating for the use of benefits.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Kanne, Evans, Sykes
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.