Roy E. Dooley, Jr. v. American Airlines, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plan fiduciaries who exercised authority to change actuarial assumptions from “time to time” did not violate ERISA section 1054(g), where a provision allowing modification of actuarial assumptions was in the pension plan
• holding that plan fiduciaries who exercised authority to change actuarial assumptions from “time to time” did not violate ERISA section 1054(g), where a provision allowing modification of actuarial assumptions was in the pension plan
• “[W]e are unwilling to contort the plain meaning of ‘amendment’ so that it includes the valid exercise of a provision which [is] already firmly ensconced in the pension document.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).