Finz v. Schlesinger (1992)

Generally, “where the federal claims are dismissed before trial ..., the state claims should be dismissed as well.” United Mine Workers, 383 U.S. at 726 , 86 S.Ct. 1130 ; Carnegie Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343, 350 , 108 S.Ct. 614 , 98 L.Ed.2d 720 (1988); see also Castellano, 937 F.2d at 758; Andreo v. Friedlander, 651 F.Supp. 877, 883 (D.Conn.1986); cf. Castellano, 937 F.2d at 758 (pendent jurisdiction implicates comity concerns); but cf. Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2…

Generally, “where the federal claims are dismissed before trial ..., the state claims should be dismissed as well.” United Mine Workers, 383 U.S. at 726 , 86 S.Ct. at 1139 ; Carnegie-Mellon University v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343, 350 , 108 S.Ct. 614, 619 , 98 L.Ed.2d 720 (1988); see also Castellano, 937 F.2d at 758; Andreo v. Friedlander, 651 F.Supp. 877, 883 (D.Conn.1986); cf. Castellano, 937 F.2d at 758 (pendent jurisdiction implicates comity concerns); but cf. Finz v. Schlesi…

See Rodriguez-Abreu, 986 F.2d at 587 ; Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 81 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 822 , 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992); Laniok v. Advisory Comm. of the Brainerd Mfg.

See Morais, 167 F.3d at 713 & n.6 (totality of the circumstances, including six factors); Finz, 957 F.2d at 82 (substantially the same test); Howell v. Motorola, Inc., 633 F.3d 552, 559 (7th Cir. 2011) (substantially the same, but weighing eight factors, including “improper conduct” by the fiduciary); Leavitt v. Nw.

See Morais, 167 F.3d at 713 & n.6 (totality of the circumstances, including six factors); Finz, 957 F.2d at 82 (substantially the same test); Howell v. Motorola, Inc., 633 F.3d 552, 559 (7th Cir. 2011) (substantially the same, but weighing eight factors, including “improper conduct” by the fiduciary); Leavitt v. Nw.

We review a district court’s decision to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state- law claims for abuse of discretion, see Kolari v. New York-Presbyterian Hosp., 455 F.3d 118 , 122 (2d Cir. 2006), “considering whether judicial economy, convenience, fairness and comity require a different result,” Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 84 (2d Cir. 1992) (citing Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343 , 350 n.7 (1988)).

Rodriguez v. DeBuono, 175 F.3d 227, 233 (2d Cir. 1999) (holding that whether private right of action can be implied from federal statute is itself sufficient federal question to meet modest requirements for subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 ). 3 comity require a different result,” Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 84 (2d Cir. 1992) (citing Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343 , 350 n.7 (1988)).

As to the merits of Defendants-Appellants’ arguments regarding the releases, “an individual can waive his or her right to participate in a pension plan governed by ERISA only if his or her waiver ‘is made knowingly and voluntarily.’ ” Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir.1992) (quoting Laniok v. Advisory Comm. of Brainerd Mfg.

Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 83 (2d Cir.1992) (upholding waiver of ERISA benefits in part because “we conclude that there is no question that [plaintiff] knew that he may have been covered under the plan when he relinquished his benefits”).

We have found helpful in this endeavor a set of six factors identified by the Second Circuit in Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir. 1992).

We have found helpful in this endeavor a set of six factors identified by the Second Circuit in Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir. 1992).

We have found helpful in this endeavor a set of six factors identified by the Second Circuit in Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir.1992). 6 Moráis contends that the record reveals a significant factual dispute concerning whether he freely and knowingly gave up his pension claims through the Agreement.

We have found helpful in this endeavor a set of six factors identified by the Second Circuit in Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir.1992). 6 12 Morais contends that the record reveals a significant factual dispute concerning whether he freely and knowingly gave up his pension claims through the Agreement.

We have found helpful, but not exclusive, a set of six factors identified by the Second Circuit in Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir.1992). 4 And yet, a challenge to a release by a person who asserted to the employer that he was disabled at the time of execution of the release may, on particular facts, warrant heightened judicial scrutiny. 5 While certain claimed disabilities may inherently raise a question about whether the employee has the capacity to give a kno…

We have found helpful, but not exclusive, a set of six factors identified by the Second Circuit in Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir. 1992).4 And yet, a challenge to a release by a person who asserted to the employer that he was disabled at the time of execution of the release may, on particular facts, warrant heightened judicial scrutiny.5 While certain claimed disabilities may inherently raise a question about whether the employee has the capacity to give a know…

Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 81 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 822 , 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992); Laniok v. Advisory Committee of Brainerd Mfg.

Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 81 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 822 , 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992); Laniok v. Advisory Committee of Brainerd Mfg.

See Frommert, 535 F.3d at 122 (reversing the district court’s finding that the ERISA release was unenforceable in part because the defendant “encouraged [the plaintiffs] to consult an attorney”); Finz, 957 F.2d at 82 (affirming the district court’s decision to enforce the ERISA release and observing that “there was no indication that [the plaintiff] was denied the opportunity to consult with an attorney about his rights under ERISA”); De Pace, 257 F. Supp. 2d at 556 (“[The p…

We have found helpful, but not exclusive, a set of six factors identified by the Second Circuit in Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir.1992). [FN4] FN4.

Id. at 181 & n.3 (first citing Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir. 1992); and then citing Lanioke v. Advisory Comm. of Brainerd Mfg.

Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir. 1992) (citation omitted); see also Smart v. Gillette Co. Long-Term Disability Plan, 70 F.3d 173, 181, n.3 (1st Cir. 1995) (treating the Second Circuit’s list of factors as “helpful rather than conclusive”).

Co., 921 F.2d 160, 162 (8th Cir.1990); Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 81-82 (2d Cir.1992); Dist. 29 United Mine Workers of Am. v. New River Co., 842 F.2d 734, 737 (4th Cir.1988); see also Vizcaino v. Microsoft Corp., 120 F.3d 1006, 1012 (9th Cir.1997) (explaining that if the defendant argued that the agreements in the case were waivers of benefits, the court “would have to consider whether the mistaken waiver must and would withstand special scrutiny designed to prevent p…

Id. (citing Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 81 (2d Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 822 , 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992)). 165 .

Mar. 10, 2006) (alteration omitted) (quoting Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 81 (2d Cir.1992)).

The Second Circuit has cautioned, however, that “[t]he validity of an individual’s waiver of pension benefits is subject to closer scrutiny than his or her waiver of general contract claims.” Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 81 (2d Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 822 , 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992); accord Sharkey v. Ultramar Energy Ltd., 70 F.3d 226, 231 (2d Cir.1995).

Where an ERISA plan participant has settled a claim involving fraud by signing a release, that individual “may not subsequently assert that he or she is not bound by the settlement because the extent of the fraud was not fully disclosed.” Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 83 (2d Cir.1992).

Id. at 181 ; Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 81 (2d Cir.1992); Carrabba v. Randalls Food Markets, Inc., 145 F.Supp.2d 763, 771 (N.D.Tex.2000).

Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 81 (2d Cir.1992), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 822 , 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992) (citing Laniok v. Advisory Comm. of Brainerd Mfg.

“We have found helpful in this endeavor a set of six factors identified by the Second Circuit in Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir.1992).” Morais, 167 F.3d at 713.

See United Mine Workers v. New River Co., 842 F.2d 734 , 737 (4th Cir.1988); Smart v. Gillette Co. Long-Term Disability Plan, 70 F.3d 173, 181 (1st Cir.1995); Rodriguez-Abreu v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 986 F.2d 580, 587 (1st Cir.1993) (holding that "ERISA does not prohibit knowing and voluntary relinquishment of employee benefits”); Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2nd Cir.1992); Lumpkin v. Envirodyne Indus., Inc., 933 F.2d 449, 455-56 (7th Cir.1991) (holding that anti-al…

United Mine Workers v. New River Co., 842 F.2d 734 ,, 737 (4th Cir.1988); 4 Smart v. Gillette Co. Long-Term Disability Plan, 70 F.3d 173, 181 (1st Cir.1995) (citing eases); Rodriguez-Abreu v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 986 F.2d 580, 587 (1st Cir.1993) (“ERISA does not prohibit knowing and voluntary relinquishment of employee benefits”); Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2nd Cir.1992); Lumpkin v. Envirodyne Indus., Inc., 933 F.2d 449, 455-56 (7th Cir.1991) (holding anti-aliena…

Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 83 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 822 , 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992), citing Bellefonte Re Ins.

(Pltffs' Exh. 36 at p. 3.) Although at the time plaintiffs were no longer employed by RCAG, and the corporation was claiming that they were no longer participants, their request triggered the administrator's disclosure responsibffities under section 104 because the question of their eligibility for benefits was at least arguable and hence they were "potential participants." See, e.g., Fine v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. - 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L…

Summary judgment is appropriate if the evidence demonstrates that “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and [that] the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 250 , 106 S.Ct. 2505, 2511 , 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986); Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 81 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).

Summary judgment is appropriate if the evidence demonstrates that “there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and [that] the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 250 , 106 S.Ct. 2505, 2511 , 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986); Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 81 (2d Cir.1992), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).

See Finz, ___ ____ 957 F.2d at 81; In re Heci Exploration Co., 862 F.2d 513 , 523 ___________________________ (5th Cir. 1988).

See Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 83 (2d Cir. 1992) (enforcing an ERISA waiver in part because there was not “a great disparity in the education or the bargaining power of the parties” and the plaintiff “knew exactly the bargain he was making”); see also Bormann, 875 F.2d at 403 (enforcing an age discrimination waiver as knowing and voluntary in part because the plaintiffs “were experienced executives familiar with reading and analyzing contracts”).

Id.; see also Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78 , 81–83 (2d Cir. 1992) (finding 17 that plaintiff validly waived his pension benefits as part of agreement settling parties’ dispute 18 regarding his ERISA plan coverage); Laniok v. Advisory Comm. of Brainerd Mfg.

See Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 80-82 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 822 , 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).

See Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 80-82 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 822 , 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).

See Finz v. Schlesin *599 ger, 957 F.2d 78 , 82 (2d Cir.1992) (holding that plan participant may execute a valid waiver of pension benefits as long as the waiver is made knowingly and voluntarily); Lumpkin v. Envirodyne Industries, Inc., 933 F.2d 449, 455 (7th Cir.1991) (holding that the anti-alienation provision of ERISA manifests Congress’s intent to prevent a worker from unknowingly signing away pension benefits, but does not impose a bar on settlement agreements in which…

See Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78 , 82 (2d Cir. 1992) (holding that plan participant may execute a valid waiver of pension benefits as long as the waiver is made knowingly and voluntarily); Lumpkin v. Envirodyne Industries, Inc., 933 F.2d 449, 455 (7th Cir. 1991) (holding that the anti-alienation provision of ERISA manifests Congress's intent to prevent a worker from unknowingly signing away pension benefits, but does not impose a bar on settlement agreements in which ben…

See Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 83 (2d Cir.) (citing Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343 , 350 n. 7, 108 S.Ct. 614 , 619 n. 7, 98 L.Ed.2d 720 (1988)), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992); Mayer v. Oil Field Sys.

See Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 83 (2d Cir.) (citing Carnegie-Mellon Univ. v. Cohill, 484 U.S. 343 , 350 n. 7, 108 S.Ct. 614 , 619 n. 7, 98 L.Ed.2d 720 (1988)), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992); Mayer v. Oil Field Sys.

See Rodriguez-Abreu v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 986 F.2d 580, 587 (1st Cir.1993) (citing Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir.1992)).

Relevant factors include: (1) plaintiff’s education and business sophistication; (2) the 1 respective roles of employer and employee in determining the provisions of the waiver; (3) the clarity of the agreement; (4) the time 2 plaintiff had to study the agreement; (5) whether plaintiff had independent advice, such as that of counsel; and (6) the consideration 3 for the waiver. 4 Id. (quotation omitted); accord Gonda, 2015 WL 678969 , at *3 (applying same six-factor test as 5…

See Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir.1992); Smart v. Gillette Co. Long-Term Disability Plan, 70 F.3d at 181 n. 3 (First Circuit treating Second Circuit’s list as helpful rather than conclusive).

See Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78 (2d Cir.1992) (noting that an individual can waive his right to participate in an ERISA pension plan only if his waiver is knowing and voluntary and that the validity of a waiver of pension benefits is subject to closer scrutiny than his waiver of general contract claims).

See Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 83-84 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 822 , 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992).

ERISA requires that the administrator furnish to each participant and each beneficiary a copy of the summary plan description and a copy of the annual report within a prescribed time period. 29 U.S.C. §§ 1021 (a)(1), 1022(a)(1), 1024(b)(1); see Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78, 82 (2d Cir.1992), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 72 , 121 L.Ed.2d 38 (1992). 3 .