1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 818 F.Supp.
  5. 818 F.Supp. 805 (1992)
 

GILLIS v. HOECHST CELANESE CORP.

Civ. A. No. 90-5542.

818 F.Supp. 805 (1992)

Leonard GILLIS and Valdo A. Sargeni, on behalf of themselves and II others similarly situated v. HOECHST CELANESE CORPORATION and Hoechst Celanese Retirement Plan.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.

September 24, 1992.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Kent Cprek, Sanford Rosenthal, Philadelphia, PA, for plaintiffs.

Laurence Z. Shiekman, Philadelphia, PA, for Hoechst.

Richard L. Strouse, Philadelphia, PA, for American Mirrex.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DITTER, District Judge.

In this case, employees claim they lost benefits when the plant where they worked was sold to another company. Plaintiffs, Leonard Gillis and Valdo A. Sargeni, are asserting claims against Hoechst-Celanese Corporation and the Hoechst-Celanese Retirement Plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1371, and the Delaware Wage Payment and Collection Act, Del.Code Ann. tit....

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases