No. 19-1239
Jackson Ridge Rehabilitation and Care, et al. v. Rhonda Meadows
Response Waived
Tags: concurrent-jurisdiction employee-benefits erisa exclusive-jurisdiction federal-jurisdiction interference retaliation statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Arbitration ERISA
Arbitration ERISA
Latest Conference:
2020-06-04
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether ERISA claims for retaliation and interference are enforced through 29 U.S.C. §1132(a)(1)(B), as decided by the Ohio Supreme Court and the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, or through 29 U.S.C. §1132(a)(3), as held by the First, Third, Sixth, and Seventh Circuits.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether ERISA claims for retaliation and interference are enforced through 29 U.S.C. §1132(a)(1)(B) or 29 U.S.C. §1132(a)(3)
Docket Entries
2020-06-08
Petition DENIED.
2020-05-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/4/2020.
2020-04-30
Waiver of right of respondent Rhonda Meadows to respond filed.
2020-04-20
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 22, 2020)
Attorneys
Jackson Ridge Rehabilitation and Care, et al.
Gracie Brenda Coey — The Coey Law Firm, LLC, Petitioner
Rhonda Meadows
Robert J. Tscholl — Respondent