Home/Case Law/T & M Meat Fair, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers, Local 174
Regular Panel Decision DecisionClass Action - Removal Jurisdiction

T & M Meat Fair, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers, Local 174

District Court, S.D. New York
MISSING

CompFox AI Summary

The plaintiffs, T & M Meat Fair, Inc. and its owners, filed a class action lawsuit in New York state court against the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) unions and affiliated funds, alleging fraud and breach of fiduciary duty related to their participation in ERISA plans. The defendants removed the case to federal court, citing original jurisdiction under ERISA and LMRA. The plaintiffs then moved to remand the case back to state court, arguing that federal jurisdiction was improper and also sought attorneys' fees and costs. The District Court denied the plaintiffs' motion to remand, finding that federal jurisdiction was proper based on at least one claim arising under ERISA in the amended complaint, and also denied the request for attorneys' fees and costs. The court explicitly stated that Count III, asserting rights under ERISA for Milano, established federal jurisdiction.

T & M Meat Fair, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers, Local 174 is a workers' compensation case decided in District Court, S.D. New York. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.

It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in District Court, S.D. New York.

Full Decision Text1 Pages

The plaintiffs, T & M Meat Fair, Inc. and its owners, filed a class action lawsuit in New York state court against the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) unions and affiliated funds, alleging fraud and breach of fiduciary duty related to their participation in ERISA plans. The defendants removed the case to federal court, citing original jurisdiction under ERISA and LMRA. The plaintiffs then moved to remand the case back to state court, arguing that federal jurisdiction was improper and also sought attorneys' fees and costs. The District Court denied the plaintiffs' motion to remand, finding that federal jurisdiction was proper based on at least one claim arising under ERISA in the amended complaint, and also denied the request for attorneys' fees and costs. The court explicitly stated that Count III, asserting rights under ERISA for Milano, established federal jurisdiction.

Read the full decision

Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.

T & M Meat Fair, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers, Local 174 workers compensation case in District Court, S.D. New York. Legal case summary, ruling, and analysis for attorneys and legal research.

T & M Meat Fair, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers, Local 174 case law summary from District Court, S.D. New York. Workers compensation legal decision, case analysis, and court ruling details.

T & M Meat Fair, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers, Local 174 Case Analysis

T & M Meat Fair, Inc. v. United Food & Commercial Workers, Local 174 is a legal case related to workers' compensation in District Court, S.D. New York. This case explains important rulings, legal interpretations, and claim decisions.

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.