Monday, November 5, 2012

Rosenberg on John Marshall Law Review's Special Edition on Supreme Court ERISA Jurisprudence

ErisaFriend of the blog, Steve Rosenberg, has an interesting post up on his blog, Boston ERISA and Insurance Litigation Blog entitled: Notes of The John Marshall Law Review's Special Edition on "The Past, Present, and Future of Supreme Court Jurisprudence on ERISA.

As Steve notes, "I think it is notable in this regard, and possibly causally related, that several of the authors are practicing lawyers who focus on ERISA litigation."  He points to articles dealing with the Moensch presumption (i.e., addressing fiduciary obligations with regards to holding employer stock in a benefit plan), the recent Supreme Court Amara court case concerning the scope of equitable remedies under ERISA, and the role of summary plan descriptions (SPDs) after Amara.

Steve is right that all of these topics are of current importance to ERISA litigation, and like Steve, I look forward to having the opportunity to read all of the John Marshall Law Review Articles in more detail.

PS

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/laborprof_blog/2012/11/rosenberg-on-john-marshall-law-reviews-special-edition-on-supreme-court-erisa-jurisprudence.html

Commentary, Pension and Benefits | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef017d3d4f9c46970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Rosenberg on John Marshall Law Review's Special Edition on Supreme Court ERISA Jurisprudence:

Comments

Post a comment