Skip to main content

Are you a legal professional? Visit our professional site

Search for legal issues
For help near (city, ZIP code or county)
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location

Eisenrich v. Minneapolis Retail Meat Cutters and Food Handlers Pension Plan, No. 08-2230

Article Placeholder Image
By FindLaw Staff on July 31, 2009 3:16 PM

In a dispute involving pension benefits brought under ERISA, summary judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where the  court did not err in finding that the defendant wrongfully suspended plaintiff's monthly pension benefits, as his new employment used different skills and was not in the same trade or craft as the position from which he had retired. The court erred in awarding plaintiff attorneys' fees under ERISA as the Plan's position was not untenable, indefensible, overbroad or unwarranted.   

Read Eisenrich v. Minneapolis Retail Meat Cutters and Food Handlers Pension Plan, No. 08-2230

Appellate Information
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.
Submitted: December 13, 2008
Filed: July 31, 2009

Judges
Before COLLOTON and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges, and GOLDBERG, Judge.
Opinion by COLLOTON, circuit Judge.

Find a Lawyer

More Options