CENTRAL LABORERS' PENSION FUND v. THOMAS E. HEINZ et al. (2004)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Seal of the Supreme Court of the United States
CENTRAL LABORERS' PENSION FUND v. THOMAS E. HEINZ et al.
Term: 2003
Important Dates
Argued: April 19, 2004
Decided: June 7, 2004
Outcome
Affirmed (includes modified)
Vote
9-0
Majority
Anthony Kennedy • Antonin Scalia • David Souter • John Paul Stevens • Clarence Thomas
Concurring
Stephen Breyer • Ruth Bader Ginsburg • Sandra Day O'Connor • William Rehnquist

CENTRAL LABORERS' PENSION FUND v. THOMAS E. HEINZ et al. is a case that was decided by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 7, 2004. The case was argued before the court on April 19, 2004.

In a 9-0 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the ruling of the lower court. The case originated from the Illinois Central U.S. District Court.

For a full list of cases decided in the 2000s, click here. For a full list of cases decided by the Rehnquist Court, click here.

[1]

About the case

  • Subject matter: Economic Activity - Employee Retirement Income Security Act (cf. union trust funds)
  • Petitioner: Employer-employee trust agreement, employee health and welfare fund, or multi-employer pension plan
  • Petitioner state: Unknown
  • Respondent type: Retired or former employee
  • Respondent state: Unknown
  • Citation: 541 U.S. 739
  • How the court took jurisdiction: Cert
  • What type of decision was made: Opinion of the court (orally argued)
  • Who was the chief justice: William Rehnquist
  • Who wrote the majority opinion: David Souter

These data points were accessed from The Supreme Court Database, which also attempts to categorize the ideological direction of the court's ruling in each case. This case's ruling was categorized as liberal.

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Harold J. Spaeth, Lee Epstein, et al., "2023 Supreme Court Database, Version 2023 Release 1 and SCDB Legacy 07," accessed March 21, 2024
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=CENTRAL_LABORERS%27_PENSION_FUND_v._THOMAS_E._HEINZ_et_al._(2004)&oldid=9486982"