No. 21-6906
Samantha J. Jackson v. AT&T Retirement Savings Plan, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-procedure de-novo-review employer-capacity erisa erisa-fiduciary-duty fiduciary-duty motion-to-dismiss plan-amendment plan-sponsor settlors-function two-hats-doctrine
Key Terms:
Arbitration ERISA
Arbitration ERISA
Latest Conference:
2022-03-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Question not identified
Question Presented (from Petition)
questions presented in the appeal, and | detailing the court's reasoning for it's decision. Did the District Court and the Appellate court | address the issues/questions presented for their de novo review, and what of it's reasoning? Did their failure to address the issues/questions presented cause them not to realize the errors the , Plaintiff had shown? , Question 5: Final judgements can be reversed for mistakes and inadvertence. Should the Court have reversed the district court's decision based on the errors shown?
Docket Entries
2022-07-14
Case considered closed.
2022-03-07
The motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. Petitioner is allowed until March 28, 2022, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
2022-02-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/4/2022.
2022-02-09
Waiver of right of respondent AT&T Retirement Savings Plan, et al. to respond filed.
2022-01-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 18, 2022)
Attorneys
AT&T Retirement Savings Plan, et al.
Wesley Earl Stockard — Littler Mendelson, P.C., Respondent
Wesley Earl Stockard — Littler Mendelson, P.C., Respondent