559 F. Supp. 2d 192 - Amara v. Cigna Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““by a participant, beneficiary, or fiduciary (A) to enjoin any act or practice which violates any provision of this subchapter or the terms of the plan, or (B) to obtain other appropriate equitable relief (i) to redress such violations or (ii) to enforce any provisions of this subchapter or the terms of the plan.” 29 U. S. C. § 1132 (a)(3) (emphasis added).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. CIGNA Corp. v. Amara · 131 S. Ct. 1866 - CIGNA Corp. v. Amara

2. “[I]n effectuating the conversion to the cash balance plan, CIGNA did not give a key notice to employees that is required by ERISA; and CIGNA’s summary plan descriptions and other materials were inadequate under ERISA and in some instances, downright misleading. ERISA gives employers substantial leeway in designing a pension plan, and the Court believes that CIGNA’s Plan complies with the relevant statutory provisions. However, ERISA also emphasizes the importance of disclosure by employers to employees regarding the details of the company’s pension plan, to enable employees to plan for their retirement and to make decisions of profound importance for their lives. This is where CIGNA failed to fulfill its obligations; the company did not provide its employees with the information they needed to understand the conversion from a traditional defined benefit plan to a cash balance plan and its effect on their retirement benefits.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 2015 Pa. Super. 43 - Cigna v. Exec. Risk Indemnity and Nutmeg Ins.

3. “(a) Prerequisites. One or more members of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all members only if: (1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable; (2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class; (3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class; and (4)the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. " (b) Types of Class Actions. A class action may be maintained if Rule 23(a) is satisfied and if ... (2) the party opposing the class has acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to the class, so that final injunc-tive relief or corresponding declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the class as a whole.... '”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Amara v. CIGNA Corp.