Q: In this task, you will be shown a prompt from a judicial decision and multiple holding statements derived from citations following text in a legal decision. Holdings represent the governing legal rule when the law is applied to a particular set of facts. There are five answer choices for each citing text. The correct answer is the holding statement that corresponds to the citing text. The four incorrect answers are other holding statements. You should find the correct option. There is a <HOLDING> token in the position of the citing text prompt where the holding statement was extracted.
plan itself and not the employer or the plan's administrator. Under ERISA, an employee benefit plan is an entity that may sue or be sued in its own right! 29 U.S.C. 1132(d)(1). However, the circuits disagree on what other parties are subject to suits for benefits. Many jurisdictions hold that the proper defendant in such a suit is either the plan itself or the plan's administrator or trustee ' exercising management over and control of the plan. Terry v. Bayer Corp., 145 F.3d 28, 34-35 (1st Cir.1998) (the proper party defendant in a 1132(a)(1)(B) action for benefits under an ERISA plan is the party that controls administration of the plan, ie., by reserving the power to decide disputes, and not a third party service provider); Crocco v. Xerox Corp., 137 F.3d 105, 107 (2d Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>); Mitchell v. Eastman Kodak Co., 113 F.3d at
Holding statements: (A) holding that making intentional representations about the future of plan benefits may be an act of plan administration (B) holding that in a recovery of benefits claim only the plan and the administrators and trustees of the plan in their capacity as such may be held liable (C) recognizing that pension plan administrators have the ability to fashion their own plan formulas (D) recognizing that plan participants should be able to access information about the plan administrators fiduciary duties from the plan administrators counsel (E) holding that erisa permits suits to recover benefits only against the plan as an entity and thus the beneficiary had erred by suing her exhusbands employer and plan administrator when proper party would have been the benefits plan itself
A:
(B)