Mead Corp. v. Tilley
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued February 22, 1989
Decided June 5, 1989
Full case nameMead Corp. v. Tilley
Docket no.87-1868
Citations490 U.S. 714 (more)
109 S. Ct. 2156; 104 L. Ed. 2d 796; 1989 U.S. LEXIS 2709
Case history
PriorTilley v. Mead Corp., 815 F.2d 989 (4th Cir. 1987); cert. granted, 488 U.S. 815 (1988).
SubsequentTilley v. Mead Corp., 927 F.2d 756 (4th Cir. 1991); cert. denied, 505 U.S. 1212 (1992).
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall · Harry Blackmun
John P. Stevens · Sandra Day O'Connor
Antonin Scalia · Anthony Kennedy
Case opinions
MajorityMarshall, joined by Rehnquist, Brennan, White, Blackmun, O'Connor, Scalia, Kennedy
DissentStevens
Laws applied
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq.

Mead Corp. v. Tilley, 490 U.S. 714 (1989), is a US labor law case, concerning occupational pensions.[1]

Facts

Judgment

Justice Thurgood Marshall, writing for the Court, held that only after an employer has met PBGC conditions to fund plans can it recoup ‘excess’ funds that would not need to cover promised benefits.

Justice John P. Stevens dissented.

In my opinion the early retirement benefits that respondents seek are contingent liabilities that under both ERISA and the Plan must be satisfied before plan assets revert to the employer. Section 4044(d) of ERISA provides that residual assets of a plan may revert to the employer only if three conditions are satisfied, including that "all liabilities of the plan to participants and their beneficiaries have been satisfied" and "the plan provides for such a distribution in these circumstances." 29 U.S.C. § 1344(d). Under the Plan, "[a]ny surplus remaining in the Retirement Fund, due to actuarial error, after the satisfaction of all benefit rights or contingent rights accrued under the Plan, . . . shall . . . be returnable to [Mead]." App. 63 (Plan, Art. XIII, § 4(f)).[2]

See also

References

  1. ↑ Mead Corp. v. Tilley, 490 U.S. 714 (1989).
  2. ↑ Mead Corp., 490 U.S. at 727 (Stevens, J., dissenting).
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.