Block on Trump's Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
In an ERISA action claiming that defendant benefit plan administrator (Wal-Mart) failed adequately to evaluate the investment options included in the plan, dismissal of the complaint is reversed where: 1) the district court erred by conflating the issue of plaintiff's Article III standing with his potential personal causes of action under ERISA; and 2) the district court erred by ignoring reasonable inferences supported by the facts alleged and drawing inferences in defendants' favor, faulting plaintiff for failing to plead facts tending to contradict those inferences.
Submitted: September 24, 2009
Filed: November 25, 2009
Opinion by Judge Murphy
Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.