Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 12 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from John Carey v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 363 Pension Plan.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | John Carey v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 363 Pension Plan Anchor | green | “upon a clear repudiation by the plan that is known, or should be known, to the plaintiff - regardless of whether the plaintiff has filed a formal application for benefits.” | 5 |
| 2 | Frommert v. Conkright | green | “the phantom account may not be applied to employees rehired prior to the issuance of the 1998 spd.” | 4 |
| 3 | John Carey v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 363 Pension Plan | green | “a cause of action under erisa accrues upon a clear repudiation by the plan that is known, or should be known, to the plaintiff - regardless of whether the plaintiff has filed a formal application for benefits.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.