18 U.S.C. § 1027
False statements and concealment of facts in relation to documents required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
Whoever, in any document required by title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (as amended from time to time) to be published, or kept as part of the records of any employee welfare benefit plan or employee pension benefit plan, or certified to the administrator of any such plan, makes any false statement or representation of fact, knowing it to be false, or knowingly conceals, covers up, or fails to disclose any fact the disclosure of which is required by such title or is necessary to verify, explain, clarify or check for accuracy and completeness any report required by such title to be published or any information required by such title to be certified, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 91
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1972–2025 · leading case: United States v. Michael C. Coyle, 63 F.3d 1239 (3rd Cir. 1995).
United States v. Michael C. Coyle, 63 F.3d 1239 (3rd Cir. 1995). “§ 1341 , five counts of making false statements on documents required by ERISA, 18 U.S.C. § 1027 , and two counts of blackmail, 18 U.”
United States v. S & Vee Cartage Co., Inc., Silverio Vitello AKA Sal Vitello, & Anna Vitello, 704 F.2d 914 (6th Cir. 1983). “Anna Vitello appeal from jury convictions on charges of knowingly making false statements in documents required to be kept by employee welfare and pension funds ( 18 U.S.C. §§ 1027 and 2 (1976)); conspiracy to make false statements in these documents ( 18 U.”
UNITED STATES of Am., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stephen SARAULT, Defendant-Appellant, 840 F.2d 1479 (9th Cir. 1988). “, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1027 , and conspiracy in violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Martorano, 596 F. Supp. 621 (E.D. Pa. 1984). “84-00032, charging him with knowingly making false statements and concealing facts in relation to a document required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), in violation of Title 18 U.S.C. § 1027 . Section 1027 provides in pertinent part: Whoever, in any…”
United States v. Bernard Tolkow, 532 F.2d 853 (2d Cir. 1976). “The jury convicted appellant of four counts of violating 18 U.S.C. § 1027 for knowingly failing to disclose party-in-inter • est loans in the Fund’s annual financial report.”
United States v. William F. Helbling, 209 F.3d 226 (3rd Cir. 2000). “§ 664 ); (3) eighteen counts of falsifying documents required by ERISA ( 18 U.S.C. § 1027 ); (4) six counts of wire fraud ( 18 U.”
United States v. Charles Novak, 443 F.3d 150 (2d Cir. 2006). “§ 186 (b)(1) (2000)), making false statements under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) ( 18 U.S.C. § 1027 (2000)), mail fraud ( 18 U.”
Russ v. Pension Consultants Co., 538 N.E.2d 693 (Ill. App. Ct. 1989). “In the second amended complaint, the plaintiff relies upon 18 U.S.C. §1027 ( 18 U.S.C. §1027 (1982)), and Internal Revenue Service rulings 81 — 114 (Rev.”
United States v. Wells, 519 U.S. 482 (1997). “§ 1026 (penalizing false statement regarding farm indebtedness for purpose of influencing Secretary of Agriculture); 18 U. S. C. § 1027 (penalizing false statement in documents required by [Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974]); 18 U.”
United States v. Furst, Sidney D., 886 F.2d 558 (3rd Cir. 1989). “The ERISA Record Charges Counts IX, X, and XI charged Furst with making false statements in ERISA records for three different years in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1027 . This section states: Whoever, in any document required by the title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security…”
United States v. Leonard C. Krimsky, 230 F.3d 855 (6th Cir. 2000). “§ 664 and three counts of making false statements and concealing facts in documents required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1027 . For the following reasons we affirm the decision of the district court.”
United States v. Alvarez, 617 F.3d 1198 (9th Cir. 2010). “farm indebtedness"); 18 U.S.C. § 1027 (punishing "any false statement" made "in any document required by [ERISA]").”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.