United States Third Circuit

In an ERISA action brought by employees of a company which had been part of AT&T alleging certain agreements effectively and improperly cancelled their "bridging" rights, summary judgment and other rulings for defendants are affirmed where: 1) challenges to the district court's rulings regarding an expert witness were meritless; 2) plaintiffs could not seek relief under ERISA section 502(a)(1)(B) because that section only provides relief for violations of the terms of a benefit plan, and plaintiffs had not alleged such a violation; 3) the relief plaintiffs requested was not "appropriate equitable relief" within the meaning of ERISA section 502(a)(3); and 4) additional challenges to the rulings below were meritless.

Appellate Information

• Decided 05/02/2007
• Published 05/02/2007

Judges

• Before:  FISHER, JORDAN and ROTH, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Third Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Noel C. Crowley, Crowley & Crowley, Morristown, NJ, Counsel for Appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Carmine A. Iannaccone, James P. Flynn, Lauren D. Daloisio, Epstein, Becker & Green, Newark, NJ, Counsel for Appellees AT&T Corp., Lucent Technologies, Inc. and NCR Corp., David M. Fabian, Christine M. Gurry, Traflet & Fabian, Morristown, NJ, Counsel for Appellee, TX PAC Group., Robert M. Leonard, Drinker, Biddle & Reath, Florham Park, NJ, Counsel for Appellee, CIT Group, Inc.