Skinner v. Northrop Grumman

Year: 2011
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit
Case Number: 10-55161

Employees had received informational documents from their employer that alluded to certain levels of benefits (“annuity equivalent offset”). UP’s brief argued that any discrepancy between the information documents and the internal plan documents should be resolved in favor of the beneficiary’s reasonable expectations, citing the stated goal of ERISA statutes that employees receive accurate information.

This brief was written pro bono by Russell G. Petti.

 

The information presented in this publication is for general informational purposes and is not a substitute for legal advice. If you have a specific legal issue or problem, United Policyholders recommends that you consult with an attorney. Guidance on hiring professional help can be found in the “Find Help” section of www.uphelp.org. United Policyholders does not sell insurance or certify, endorse or warrant any of the insurance products, vendors, or professionals identified on our website.

Source: https://uphelp.org/amicus-briefs/skinner-v-northrop-grumman/
Date: April 24, 2024