Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Chevron Corp. v. Joliff

September 22, 2009

CHEVRON CORPORATION AND ACS HR SOLUTIONS, LLC, AS SUBROGEE OF CHEVRON CORPORATION AND THE CHEVRON RETIREMENT PLAN, PLAINTIFFS/COUNTERDEFENDANTS,
v.
CARL H. JOLIFF, DEFENDANT/COUNTERPLAINTIFF.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: J. Phil Gilbert United States District Judge

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on the motion (Doc. 22) filed by plaintiffs/ counterdefendants Chevron Corporation and ACS HR Solutions, LLC to strike defendant/ counterplaintiff Carl H. Joliff's jury demand in his amended counterclaim, which asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty and estoppel under § 502(a)(3)(B) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(3)(B). Joliff has not responded to the motion to strike. The Court construes Joliff's failure to respond as an admission of the merits of the motion. See Local Rule 7.1(c). Indeed, the motion has merit, for as a general rule there is no right to a jury trial for ERISA claims because the relief requested is equitable in nature. Matthews v. Sears Pension Plan, 144 F.3d 461, 468 (7th Cir. 1998). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion to strike (Doc. 22) and STRIKES the jury demand in Joliff's amended counterclaim (Doc. 19)

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20090922

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.