fbpx
Wikipedia

Central Laborers' Pension Fund v. Heinz

Central Laborers' Pension Fund v. Heinz, 541 U.S. 739 (2004), is a case that was argued in the Supreme Court of the United States on 19 April 2004. The question it presented was whether Section 204(g) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act contradicts Section 203(a)(3)(B).

Central Laborers' Pension Fund v. Heinz
Argued April 19, 2004
Decided June 7, 2004
Full case nameCentral Laborers' Pension Fund, Petitioner v. Thomas E. Heinz, et al.
Citations541 U.S. 739 (more)
124 S. Ct. 2230; 159 L. Ed. 2d 46
Holding
ERISA §204(g) prohibits a plan amendment expanding the categories of postretirement employment that triggers suspension of the payment of early retirement benefits already accrued.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
David Souter · Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg · Stephen Breyer
Case opinions
MajoritySouter, joined by unanimous court
ConcurrenceBreyer, joined by Rehnquist, O'Connor, Ginsburg

See also edit

Further reading edit

  • Clarkson, Michael; Thomas, Ann (2004). "Recent Developments in Employer-Employee Relations". Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Law Journal. 40: 369. ISSN 1543-3234.
  • Ryan, Priscilla E.; Sharara, Norma M. (2004). "Employee Benefits". Tax Lawyer. 58: 1055. ISSN 0040-005X.

External links edit

  • Text of Central Laborers' Pension Fund v. Heinz, 541 U.S. 739 (2004) is available from: Findlaw  Google Scholar  Justia  Oyez (oral argument audio) 


central, laborers, pension, fund, heinz, 2004, case, that, argued, supreme, court, united, states, april, 2004, question, presented, whether, section, employee, retirement, income, security, contradicts, section, supreme, court, united, statesargued, april, 20. Central Laborers Pension Fund v Heinz 541 U S 739 2004 is a case that was argued in the Supreme Court of the United States on 19 April 2004 The question it presented was whether Section 204 g of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act contradicts Section 203 a 3 B Central Laborers Pension Fund v HeinzSupreme Court of the United StatesArgued April 19 2004Decided June 7 2004Full case nameCentral Laborers Pension Fund Petitioner v Thomas E Heinz et al Citations541 U S 739 more 124 S Ct 2230 159 L Ed 2d 46HoldingERISA 204 g prohibits a plan amendment expanding the categories of postretirement employment that triggers suspension of the payment of early retirement benefits already accrued Court membershipChief Justice William Rehnquist Associate Justices John P Stevens Sandra Day O ConnorAntonin Scalia Anthony KennedyDavid Souter Clarence ThomasRuth Bader Ginsburg Stephen BreyerCase opinionsMajoritySouter joined by unanimous courtConcurrenceBreyer joined by Rehnquist O Connor GinsburgSee also editList of United States Supreme Court cases volume 541 List of United States Supreme Court casesFurther reading editClarkson Michael Thomas Ann 2004 Recent Developments in Employer Employee Relations Tort Trial amp Insurance Practice Law Journal 40 369 ISSN 1543 3234 Ryan Priscilla E Sharara Norma M 2004 Employee Benefits Tax Lawyer 58 1055 ISSN 0040 005X External links editText of Central Laborers Pension Fund v Heinz 541 U S 739 2004 is available from Findlaw Google Scholar Justia Oyez oral argument audio nbsp This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub You can help Wikipedia by expanding it vte Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Central Laborers 27 Pension Fund v Heinz amp oldid 1175140070, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.