Peterson v. Windham Community Memorial Hospital, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a former employee lacked standing to assert a claim against the defendant under Section 502(c)(1) because the former employee did not have a “reasonable expectation of returning to covered employment” or a “col-orable claim to vested benefits”
• finding that a former employee could not demonstrate that he had a reasonable expectation of returning to covered employment on the date that he claimed to have requested Plan documents, as he had resigned from such employment approximately ten months earlier
• “An individual is only entitled to damages under [29 U.S.C. § 1132(c)(1)] if that individual can establish that he or she fits within the definition of ‘participant.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).