William J. Riley v. Meba Pension Trust

How courts have described this case

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

• reviewing an exclusionary provision which affected only a single individual under § 302, but finding it not arbitrary or capricious
• rejecting \the notion that Sec. 302(c)(5) [and Sec. 302(e) ] gave the federal courts a roving jurisdiction over ... the structure of pension plans\
• reviewing an exclusionary provision which affected only a single individual under § 302, but finding it not arbitrary or capricious
• same standard of review applies to trustees’ plan interpretations in an action seeking relief under § 502(a) generally
• “[Cjare must be taken not to subvert the intention of Congress to postpone the effective date of the vesting provisions in order to afford a fair opportunity to bring plans and their application in line with the new vesting requirements.”
• continuing violation if benefits suspended rather than completely forfeited

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).