Cases 1 - 6 of 6
Wegmans Retirement Plans Advisory Committee et al v. Marcellus et al
as 6:2024cv06145
Plaintiff:
Wegmans Retirement Plans Advisory Committee and Wegmans Retirement Plans
Defendant:
Matah Marcellus and Marie Kettely Jeannott
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Smith v. Smith et al
as 1:2023cv00374
Plaintiff:
Ramone Smith
Defendant:
Karen Smith, Hallmark Cards, Inc., Hallmark Benefit Plan Advisory Committee and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal-ERISA
MATEYA v. COOK GROUP INCORPORATED et al
as 1:2022cv01271
Plaintiff:
DREW MATEYA
Defendant:
COOK GROUP INCORPORATED, COOK GROUP INC. PROFIT SHARING PLAN, COOK GROUP PROFIT SHARING PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Ramos, et al v. Banner Health, et al
as 20-1231
Defendant / Appellee:
WILFORD A. CARDON, THOMAS R. KOELBL, DENNIS DAHLEN and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DELRI HANSON, individually and as representatives of a class of plan participants, on behalf of Banner Health Employees 401(k) Plan, CONSTANCE R. WILLIAMSON, KAREN F. MCLEOD and others
Ramos et al v. Banner Health et al
as 1:2015cv02556
Plaintiff:
Lorraine M. Ramos , Constance R. Williamson , Karen F. McLeod and others
Defendant:
Banner Health , Banner Health Board of Directors, Laren Bates and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
Wangberger v. Janus Capital Group
as 06-2003
:
In re: MUTUAL FUNDS INVESTMENT LITIGATION
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CRAIG WANGBERGER, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
Defendant - Appellee:
JANUS CAPITAL GROUP, INCORPORATED and PLAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Defendant:
CHARLES SCHWAB TRUST COMPANY, ADVISORY COMMITTEE, STEVEN L. SCHEID and others
Amicus Supporting Appellant:
SECRETARY OF LABOR
Amicus Supporting Appellee:
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
