On June 1, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Thole v. U.S. Bank N.A., holding that participants in a defined-benefit pension plan who have so far been paid all of their pension benefits lack Article III standing to sue for...more
6/2/2020
/ Article III ,
Breach of Duty ,
Defined Benefit Plans ,
Duty of Loyalty ,
Duty of Prudence ,
Employee Benefits ,
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) ,
Fiduciary Duty ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Investment Adviser ,
Mismanagement ,
Pensions ,
Plan Participants ,
Retirement Plan ,
SCOTUS ,
Standing ,
Thole v U.S. Bank
On May 13, 2019, the Supreme Court decided Franchise Tax Board of California v. Hyatt, No. 17-1299, holding that a private party may not sue a non-consenting state in another state’s courts.
In Nevada v. Hall, 440 U.S. 410...more
5/14/2019
/ Article III ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Franchise Tax Board of California v Hyatt ,
Judgment Creditors ,
Jury Verdicts ,
NV Supreme Court ,
Precedential Opinion ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Sovereign Immunity ,
Stare Decisis ,
States Rights ,
Without Consent
On May 16, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339, vacating the decision of the Ninth Circuit and remanding to the Ninth Circuit to consider the “concrete-injury” requirement...more
On May 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Wellness International Network, Ltd. v. Sharif, (No. 13-935), holding that Article III does not prevent bankruptcy judges from entering final judgment on claims that seek only...more
5/28/2015
/ Alter Ego ,
Appeals ,
Article III ,
Bankruptcy Code ,
Judicial Authority ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Stern v Marshall ,
Trust Assets ,
Wellness International Network v Sharif
In Executive Benefits Ins. Agency v. Arkison, No. 12-1200, the Supreme Court ruled that when Article III does not permit a bankruptcy court to enter final judgment on a core bankruptcy claim, the bankruptcy court may issue...more