CIGNA Corp. v. Amara

Docket No.
Op. Below
Argument
Nov 30, 2010
Tr.Aud.
Opinion
Vote
8-0
Author
Breyer
Term

Holding: Although the district court did not have authority under Section 502(a)(1)(B) of ERISA to reform CIGNA's pension plan, it did have authority to do so under another provision, Section 502(a)(3). (Sotomayor, J., recused).

Plain English Holding: Courts may order changes to the terms of a pension plan to remedy false or otherwise unlawful disclosures by the plan to the plan participants.

Judgment: Second Circuit vacated and remanded, 8-0, in an opinion by Justice Breyer on May 16, 2011. Justices Scalia and Thomas concurred in the judgment only. (Sotomayor, J., recused).

SCOTUSblog Coverage

Briefs and Documents

CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY

Merits Briefs

Amicus Briefs

Certiorari-Stage Documents

CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY