Shelby Collins v. United Mine Workers of America Welfare and Retirement Fund of 1950, W. A. Boyle, Josephine Roche, C. W. Davis, Trustees

D.C. Circuit

Shelby Collins v. United Mine Workers of America Welfare and Retirement Fund of 1950, W. A. Boyle, Josephine Roche, C. W. Davis, Trustees

439 F.2d 494, 74 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3035

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedAugust 14, 1970

Docket23234

StatusPublished

Cited by28 cases

This text of 439 F.2d 494 (Shelby Collins v. United Mine Workers of America Welfare and Retirement Fund of 1950, W. A. Boyle, Josephine Roche, C. W. Davis, Trustees) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Shelby Collins v. United Mine Workers of America Welfare and Retirement Fund of 1950, W. A. Boyle, Josephine Roche, C. W. Davis, Trustees, 439 F.2d 494, 74 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3035 (D.C. Cir. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

LEVENTHAL, Circuit Judge:

This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court ordering the appellant Fund to pay a pension to appellee Collins. Collins, like appellants in Roark et al. v. Boyle, 439 F.2d 497, decided today, had applied for a pension and been rejected on the ground that his last employment in the coal industry was not with a signatory employer. The District Court held this requirement invalid as being arbitrary and capricious. We affirm for the reasons set forth in our Roark opinion.

Affirmed.

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

LEVENTHAL, Circuit Judge:

This is an appeal from a judgment of the District Court ordering the appellant Fund to pay a pension to appellee Collins. Collins, like appellants in Roark et al. v. Boyle, 439 F.2d 497, decided today, had applied for a pension and been rejected on the ground that his last employment in the coal industry was not with a signatory employer. The District Court held this requirement invalid as being arbitrary and capricious. We affirm for the reasons set forth in our Roark opinion.

Affirmed.

Stephen Pete on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, Louis Belton, Plaintiff-Intervenor-Appellees v. United Mine Workers of America Welfare and Retirement Fund of 1950, Slimp Kiser, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Harry Huge, and United Mine Workers of America Welfare and Retirementfund of 1950, Slimp Kiser, on Behalf of Himself and All Other Persons Who Have Been Deniedpension Payments From the United Mine Workers of America Welfare and Retirementfund v. W. A. Boyle

517 F.2d 1275 (D.C. Circuit, 1975)

Pete v. United Mine Workers of America Welfare & Retirement Fund of 1950

517 F.2d 1275 (D.C. Circuit, 1975)

French v. Construction Laborers Pension Trust

44 Cal. App. 3d 479 (California Court of Appeal, 1975)

Kiser v. Huge

517 F.2d 1237 (D.C. Circuit, 1974)

United States v. Mamie E. Perkins

498 F.2d 1054 (D.C. Circuit, 1974)

United States v. Michael H. Hinkle

487 F.2d 1205 (D.C. Circuit, 1973)

United States v. Patricia Dent

477 F.2d 447 (D.C. Circuit, 1973)

State v. Close

499 P.2d 287 (Utah Supreme Court, 1972)

Patterson v. United Mine Workers of America Welfare & Retirement Fund

346 F. Supp. 11 (E.D. Tennessee, 1971)

Andrea Depaoli v. W. A. Boyle

447 F.2d 334 (D.C. Circuit, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

439 F.2d 494, 74 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3035, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shelby-collins-v-united-mine-workers-of-america-welfare-and-retirement-cadc-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack