Moyer v. Kirkpatrick

387 F.2d 955, 67 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2139
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit·Decided January 4, 1968·No. No. 16622·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM:

The appellant plaintiffs, members of Bricklayers Local No. 12, Chester, Pa., filed a Complaint in the District Court for a declaratory judgment, alleging that the defendant appellees, trustees of a jointly administered health and welfare fund (“Fund”) acted improperly in refusing to accept payments into the Fund from non-member, non-subscribing employers, and in setting certain requirements for eligibility for benefits. The Complaint based jurisdiction on the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act, as amended.1

The District Court dismissed the Complaint for lack of jurisdiction, and alternatively, for failure of the Complaint to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.

On review of the record we find no error. The Order of the District Court dismissing the Complaint will be affirmed for the reasons so well-stated by Judge Luongo in his Opinion reported at 265 F.Supp. 348 (1967).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Moyer v. Kirkpatrick, 387 F.2d 955, 67 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2139 (3d Cir. 1968).

387 F.2d 955 (Moyer v. Kirkpatrick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Francis Snider v. All State Administrators, Inc.
481 F.2d 387 (Fifth Circuit, 1973)