Skip to main content

Urlaub v. Citgo Petroleum Corporation

N.D. Ill.May 16, 2024No. 1:21-cv-04133
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
791 Labor: E.R.I.S.A.
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
motion to dismiss

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

Court provisionally granted plaintiffs' motion for class certification subject to amendment of the class definition to create a subclass of members issued checks on or after August 3, 2015, with Urlaub and Ferry as representatives. The court rejected defendants' statute-of-limitations arguments at the certification stage, finding genuine disputes of material fact requiring trial resolution.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened** An employee named Urlaub filed a lawsuit against Citgo Petroleum Corporation over employee benefits issues. The case involved ERISA, which is the federal law that protects workers' retirement plans, health insurance, and other employee benefits. The specific details of what benefits dispute led to this lawsuit are not clear from the available information. **What the Court Decided** The federal court in Illinois dismissed Urlaub's case on May 16, 2024. This means the court rejected the employee's claims and sided with Citgo. The employee did not receive any money damages or other relief from the company. **Why This Matters for Workers** This case shows how challenging it can be for employees to win ERISA-related lawsuits against their employers. ERISA cases often involve complex rules about employee benefits, and companies typically have strong legal defenses. Workers who believe their employer has wrongfully denied benefits or mismanaged their retirement plans should understand that these cases require very specific evidence and procedures. While this particular employee was unsuccessful, workers still have important rights under ERISA to receive proper information about their benefits and fair treatment regarding their retirement and health plans.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.