Citation network
Massachusetts Vs. Morash
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Apr 18, 1989
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
U.S. 107 (1989) U.S. Supreme Court Massachusetts v. MorashSearch
-
U.S. 107 (1989) Massachusetts v. MorashSearch
-
N.E.2d 409 (1988). The court found that, under the plain language of the statute and its earlier decision in Barry v. DymoSearch
-
of funds that had been accumulated to finance various types of employee benefits. Fort Halifax Packing Co. v. CoyneSearch
-
Nachman Corp. v. PensionSearch
-
and establishes schedules for the vesting and accrual of pension benefits. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. MassachusettsSearch
-
law, and can be brought in federal court without regard for the amount in controversy. See Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSearch
-
members who typically work for several employers during the course of a year, see, e.g., Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. ConstructionSearch
-
vacation benefits would subject a single employer to the regulatory provisions of ERISA. See California Hospital Assn. v. HenningSearch
-
Page 490 U. S. 115 Schreiber v. BurlingtonSearch
-
Northern, Inc., 472 U. S. 1 , 472 U. S. 8 (1985) (quoting Securities Industry Assn. v. BoardSearch
-
Pilot Life Insurance Co. v. DedeauxSearch
-
only upon termination of employment, are employee welfare benefit plans within the meaning of the Act. See Holland v. BurlingtonSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Industries, Inc., 772 F.2d 1140 (CA4 1985), summarily aff'd sub nom. Brooks v. BurlingtonSearch
-
Gilbert v. BurlingtonSearch
-
Industries, Inc., 765 F.2d 320 (CA2 1985), summarily aff'd sub nom. Roberts v. BurlingtonSearch
-
and to whose reasonable views we give deference, Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. NaturalSearch
-
Fort Halifax Packing Co. v. CoyneSearch
-
solely because the employees did not use their vacation days prior to their formal termination of employment. See Shea v. WellsSearch
-
Griffin v. OceanicSearch
-
Compare Holland v. NationalSearch
-
Blakeman v. MeadSearch
-
F.2d 1146 (CA6 1985) (both holding that vacation benefits constitute employee welfare benefit plan) with Shea v. WellsSearch
-
California Hospital Assn. v. HenningSearch
-
Golden Bear Family Restaurants, Inc. v. MurraySearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Massachusetts v. MorashSearch
-
Barry v. DymoSearch
-
Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. MassachusettsSearch
-
See Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSearch
-
Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. ConstructionSearch
-
of ERISA. See California Hospital Assn. v. HenningSearch
-
Schreiber v. BurlingtonSearch
-
Securities Industry Assn. v. BoardSearch
-
of the Act. See Holland v. BurlingtonSearch
-
Brooks v. BurlingtonSearch
-
Roberts v. BurlingtonSearch
-
Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. NaturalSearch
-
See Shea v. WellsSearch
-
Griffin v. OceanicSearch
-
Shea v. WellsSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial