Lockheed Corp. v. Spink, 517 U.S. 882, 17 (1996)

Page:   Index   Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17

898

LOCKHEED CORP. v. SPINK

Opinion of Breyer, J.

Justice Breyer, with whom Justice Souter joins, concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I join the Court's opinion except for its conclusion in Part III-B that "the payment of benefits pursuant to an amended plan, regardless of what the plan requires of the employee in return for those benefits, does not constitute a prohibited transaction." Ante, at 895. The legal question addressed in Part III-B is a difficult one, which we need not here answer and which would benefit from further development in the lower courts, where interested parties who are experienced in these highly technical, important matters could present their views. Accordingly, I would follow the suggestion of the Solicitor General that the Court not reach the issue in this case.

Page:   Index   Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17

Last modified: October 4, 2007