Milofsky v. Am. Airlines, 418 F.3d 429 (5th Cir. 2005). · Go Syfert
Search
Milofsky v. Am. Airlines, 418 F.3d 429 (5th Cir. 2005). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
8 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: In Re Mutual Funds Investment Litigation (mdd, 2005-12-06)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" In Re Mutual Funds Investment Litigation
D. Maryland · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See 418 F.3d 429 (5th Cir.2005). 13 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Rogers v. Baxter International Inc.
N.D. Ill. · 2006 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Milofsky v. American Airlines, Inc., 404 F.3d 338 (5th Cir.2005) reh’g en banc granted, 418 F.3d 429 (5th Cir.2005) (vacating a Fifth Circuit panel’s decision holding that suits under § 502(a)(2) must benefit all plan participants); In re Schering-Plough Corp. Erisa Litigation, 387 F.Supp.2d 392, 401 (D.N.J.2004) (holding that suits under § 502(a)(2) must be benefit all plan participants), overruled by In re Schering-Plough Corp. ERISA Litigation, 420 F.3d 231 (3d Cir.2005).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Michael Milofsky, on Behalf of Themselves and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, and on Behalf of the Super Saver-A 401(k) Capital Accumulation Plan for Employees of Participating Amr Corporation Subsidiaries Robert Walsh, on Behalf of Themselves and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, and on Behalf of the Super Saver-A 401(k) Capital Accumulation Plan for Employees of Participating Amr Corporation Subsidiaries
v.
American Airlines, Inc. John Does 1-10, as Members of the Pension Asset Administration Committee of the Super Saver-A 401(k) Capital Accumulation Plan for Employees of Participating Amr Corporation Subsidiaries John Does, 11-20, as Members of the Pension Benefits Administration Committee of the Super Saver-A 401(k) Capital Accumulation Plan for Employees of Participating Amr Corporation Subsidiaries Towers, Perrin
03-11087.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Jul 19, 2005.
418 F.3d 429
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published

418 F.3d 429

Michael MILOFSKY, On Behalf of Themselves and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, and on Behalf of the Super Saver-A 401(k) Capital Accumulation Plan for Employees of Participating AMR Corporation Subsidiaries; Robert Walsh, on Behalf of Themselves and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, and on Behalf of the Super Saver-A 401(k) Capital Accumulation Plan for Employees of Participating AMR Corporation Subsidiaries, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC.; John Does 1-10, as Members of the Pension Asset Administration Committee of the Super Saver-A 401(k) Capital Accumulation Plan for Employees of Participating AMR Corporation Subsidiaries; John Does, 11-20, as Members of the Pension Benefits Administration Committee of the Super Saver-A 401(k) Capital Accumulation Plan for Employees of Participating AMR Corporation Subsidiaries; Towers, Perrin, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 03-11087.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

July 19, 2005.

Jani K. Rachelson, Bruce S. Levine, Elizabeth O'Leary, Cohen, Weiss & Simon, New York City, Hal K. Gillespie, Gillespie, Rozen, Watsky, Motley & Jones, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Edward Patterson Perrin, Jr., Jennifer Ruth Poe, Hallett & Perrin, Dallas, TX, for American Airlines, Inc.

Robert Elwood Sheeder, Jason Edward Winford, T. David Cowart, Jenkens & Gilchrist, Dallas, TX, for Towers, Perrin.

Elizabeth Hopkins, Karen L. Handorf, U.S. Dept. of Labor, Washington, DC, for U.S. Dept. of Labor, Amicus Curiae.

Mary Ellen Signorille, Am. Ass'n of Retired Persons, Washington, DC, for AARP, Amicus Curiae.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas; James E. Kinkeade, Judge.

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC

(Opinion March 16, 2005, 5 Cir., 2005, 404 F.3d 338)

Before KING, Chief Judge, and JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, JONES, SMITH, WIENER, BARKSDALE, GARZA, DeMOSS, BENAVIDES, STEWART, DENNIS, CLEMENT, PRADO and OWEN, Circuit Judges.

BY THE COURT:

1

A member of the Court in active service having requested a poll on the petition for rehearing en banc and a majority of the judges in active service having voted in favor of granting a rehearing en banc, IT IS ORDERED that this cause shall be reheard by the court en banc with oral argument on a date hereafter to be fixed. The Clerk will specify a briefing schedule for the filing of supplemental briefs.