Robert J. Devlin v. Robert A. Scardelletti et al. (536 U.S. 1)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided June 10, 2002 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 536 U.S. 1 · 122 S. Ct. 2005
- Decided
- June 10, 2002
- Term
- October Term 2001
- Vote
- 6–3
- Majority author
- Justice O'Connor
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
Justice O’Connor delivered the opinion of the Court. Petitioner, a nonnamed member of a class certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(1), sought to appeal the approval of a settlement over objections he stated at the fairness hearing. The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that he lacked the power to bring such an appeal because he was not a named class representative and because he had not successfully moved to intervene in the litigation. We now reverse. I Petitioner Robert Devlin, a retired worker represented by the Transportation Communications International Union (Union), participates in a defined benefits pension plan (Plan) administered by the Union. In 1991, on the recommendation of the Plan’s trustees, the Plan was amended to add a cost of living adjustment (COLA) for retired and active employees. As it turned out, however, the Plan was not able to support such a large benefits increase. To address this problem, the Plan’s new trustees sought to freeze the COLA. Because they were concerned about incurring Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) liability by eliminating the COLA for retired workers, see 29 U. S. C. § 1054(g)(1) (1994 ed.) (providing that accrued benefits “may not be decreased by an amendment of the plan”), the trustees froze the COLA only as to active employees. Because the Plan still lacked sufficient funds,…
Excerpt of a 22,117-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.