Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): the account controlled by BCBST, BCBST had effective access to the funds in the larger account. Its check writing authority makes BCBST a fiduciary. The only alleged breach of fiduciary duty with respect to the checking account was BCBST’s retention of interest on the float and on delayed payments to individual physicians. Plaintiffs allege that BCBST’s retention of that interest violates 29 U.S.C. § 1106(a)(1)(A) barring a plan fiduciary from causing the plan to sell, lease, or exchange property with a party in interest. Other courts which have addressed the issue, however, consider the retention of interest on float to be an issue of compensation, where it is clear that float will be created. See Assocs. in Adolescent Psychiatry, S.C. v. Home Life Ins. Co., 941 F.2d 561, 564, 568-69 (<HOLDING>); Sirna v. Prudential Securities, Inc., 964 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that rule 63 applies to pleadings filed within seven days of summary judgment proceedings (B) holding that interest on float is part of compensation (C) holding defendant was afforded substantive and procedural due process at the administrative level when he was given seven days to respond to a prepenalty notice for negligence (D) holding that rule 6e did not extend the period in which a workers compensation carrier was required to pay a compensation award under the longshore and harbor workers compensation act where the act required payment within ten days of filing of the order as opposed to within ten days of service of notice provided for in the rule (E) holding that where it was clear up to seven days of float might exist interest on float was contracted for compensation
Output (English): holding defendant was afforded substantive and procedural due process at the administrative level when he was given seven days to respond to a prepenalty notice for negligence