Pacific Lighting Corp. v. Mgw, Inc

How later courts describe this case

• “Giving an employee more work, which could even be perceived as giving ‘an employee a chance to excel,’ is not an adverse employment action.”
• stating, "We agree that the two paragraphs quoted above refer to different obligations— that the first paragraph creates a contractual obligation for reimbursement and that the second paragraph deals with a statutory or common-law right to subrogation.”
• “[m]ere influence over the trustee’s investment decisions ... is not effective control over plan assets,” where ultimate decision-making authority rests elsewhere
• non-ERISA ease containing instructional but non-binding sum mary of Florida law of ambiguity, and finding the undefined term “experimental” to be ambiguous in the context of a major medical insurance policy
• non-ERISA case containing instructional but non-binding summary of Florida law of ambiguity, and finding the undefined term “experimental” to be ambiguous in the context of a major medical insurance policy