IN RE JONES & LAUGHLIN RETIREMENT PLAN, AND PENSION BENEFIT GUARANTY CORPORATION, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES,
v.
THE LTV CORPORATION, AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE JONES & LAUGHLIN RETIREMENT PLAN, DEFENDANT-APPELLEE, APPEAL OF DAVID H. MILLER AND WILLIAM W. SHAFFER
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that ERISA does not entitle plan participants to pre-termination notice and hearings when PBGC and the plan administrator agree on termination.
Appellants, participants in a retirement plan, appealed the district court's denial of their motion to stay/vacate a Consent Order. The Consent Order …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Plan Termination cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
David Miller and William Shaffer appeal from a judgment entered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Owen, J., which denied their motion to stay and/or vacate a Consent Order previously signed by Judge Owen. The Consent Order was submitted to Judge Owen by The LTV Corporation and LTV Steel Company, the administrators of the Jones & Laughlin Retirement Plan, and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC). The Consent Order appointed PBGC to serve as statutory trustee of the plan and terminated it.
Appellants, participants in the plan, complain that, by approving the termination without affording them an opportunity to challenge the termination decision, the district court violated the notice and hearing provisions set forth in Title IV of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 1301-1461 (West 1985 & Supp.1987) (ERISA), as amended by the Single-Employer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 1986, Pub.L. No. 99-272, Title XI (1986).
In a companion appeal, we rejected the claim that ERISA entitles plan participants to pre-termination notice and hearings where, as here, PBGC and the plan administrator agree that a plan must be terminated. See In re: Jones & Laughlin Hourly Pension Plan, 824 F. 2d 197 (2d Cir.1987). That decision controls this case as well.
Judgment affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Jones & Laughlin Hourly Pension Plan & Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. v. The LTV Corp., 824 F.2d 197 (2d Cir. 1987)
Authorities Cited
- In re Jones & Laughlin Hourly Pension Plan & Pension Benefit Guar. Corp. v. The LTV Corp., 824 F.2d 197 (2d Cir. 1987)