W.E. Partners II, LLC v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “[t]he [c]ourt [could] properly consider the [p]lan and the [s]ummary [p]lan description on [the] motion to dismiss because they [were] essential to the plaintiffs' ERISA claims and incorporated by reference into their complaint”
• considering “the Plan and the Summary Plan Description” on a motion to dismiss “because they are essential to the plaintiffs’ ERISA claims and incorporated by reference”
• “The relief available under [§ 502(a)(3)] is limited to equitable relief: monetary damages are generally unavailable.”
• “motions to strike are generally disfavored, and should be granted only when there is a strong reason for doing so”
• “The Court can properly consider the Plan and the Summary Plan Description on this motion to dismiss because they are essential to the plaintiffs’ ERISA claims and incorporated by reference into their complaint.”
• “Courts have interpreted this language to mean that [§ 1059] does not create a private right of action but instead affords the remedy of a civil penalty to be paid to the Secretary of Labor.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).