Schultz v. Stoner

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 action was equitable in nature, and therefore properly brought pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(3), where the plaintiffs sought “broad-based corrective action” in how a fiduciary administered an ERISA benefits plan

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).