Join The Conversation
Roger Baron
11/17/2008 01:47 PM
I am amazed at how quickly the transcript came out for this. Thanks for blogging this, Brian.
Curtis L. Kennedy
11/17/2008 01:47 PM
Brian, thanks for getting this posted, as it made interesting reading last night.
I am very surprised the Court did not address the key issue - whether a loss to an individual account plan is the same as "loss to the plan" under Section 409. And, after seeing all the time spent by several Justices surmising whether a loss to the plan can be remedied under Section 502(a)(1)(B), I'm glad to know the Court has a passel of bright law clerks.
Curtis
Curtis L. Kennedy
Attorney-at-law
8405 E. Princeton Ave.
Denver, CO 80237-1741
Tele: 303-770-0440
Fax: 303-843-0360
[email protected]
http://www.uswestretiree.org/legal2.htm
Brian S. King
11/17/2008 01:47 PM
Thanks Curtis. I, like you, am surprised that the Court did not spend more time on the loss-to-the-plan vs. individual losses issue. They did reach it, eventually, in the diamonds metaphor that Breyer eventually got to. But I too was surprised at the discussion of (a)(1)(B). That seemed to be a diversion.
And Roger, I was also amazed about the time for the transcript. I didn't expect it until today or tomorrow.
Post A Comment
Articles
- Posted on 05/17/2011 CIGNA v. Amara
- Posted on 03/29/2011 Bloomberg Markets' article on ERISA
- Posted on 12/24/2010 James F. v. CIGNA Behavioral Health Inc.
News
- Posted on 07/11/2019 Timothy D. v. Aetna Health and Life Ins. Co.
- Posted on 06/24/2019 Family says insurance fails to pay for mental health coverage despite medical necessity
- Posted on 04/24/2006 Eliminating Discretionary Clauses in Insurance Policies