Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Federal Common Law And Gaps In Federal Statutes: The Case Of Erisa Plan Limitation Periods For Section 502(A)(1)(B) Actions, Jim Greiner
Michigan Law Review
This Note argues that federal courts should adopt a uniform national rule that upholds plan provisions modifying the limitation period for a section 502(a)(l)(B) action. Part I examines the reasoning of those courts that have borrowed state law to determine the validity of modifications of the limitation period applicable to actions arising under BRISA section 502(a)(l)(B) and under other federal statutes. Part I argues that those courts may have incorrectly characterized the validity of plan limitation periods as an issue of limitation law. As a consequence of this characterization, those courts have followed the Supreme Court's rule that, when borrowing …
Employment Discrimination Claims Under Erisa Section 510: Should Courts Require Exhaustion Of Arbitral And Plan Remedies?, Jared A. Goldstein
Employment Discrimination Claims Under Erisa Section 510: Should Courts Require Exhaustion Of Arbitral And Plan Remedies?, Jared A. Goldstein
Michigan Law Review
This Note examines whether courts should require section 510 claimants to exhaust either plan-based or arbitral remedies before seeking judicial relief. It begins by comparing the basis for an exhaustion requirement with respect to benefits claims with the basis for such a requirement with respect to statutory claims - like those under section 510. Part I examines the rationale courts have offered for requiring exhaustion of plan remedies for benefits claims. Part I concludes that federal courts have correctly determined that Congress intended individuals bringing benefits claims to exhaust the remedies provided by the plan before seeking judicial relief. Part …