Second Circuit· 8/9/2000

Salovaara v. Eckert

Citations

222 F.3d 19

How courts have described this case

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

reversing a finding of bad faith that heavily relied on the plaintiffs failure, due to a misunderstanding of the case law, to produce evidence in support of his main arguments
reversing the district court’s grant of attorney’s fees to defendant because plaintiff did not act in bad faith and the first and third Chambless factors weighed against such award
reversing ERISA fee award to the defendant where the ERISA claims asserted by the plaintiff “were not entirely devoid of merit,” and noting that the plaintiff-had prevailed in a state-court action that was related to his unsuccessful ERISA suit
ultimate lack of evidentiary support does not establish bad faith where there was a reasonable basis for claim at the commencement of the action
“[WJhere ... an ERISA plaintiff has pursued a colorable claim, the third Chambless factor likely is not merely neutral, but weighs strongly against granting fees to the prevailing defendant.”
“The [d]istrict [c]ourt held that the fifth factor (whether the action conferred or sought to confer a ‘common benefit’) was inapplicable to [the] ERISA defendant[.]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

30 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this 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.