Anyway the retroactive modification of a plan can't be used to diminish damages to which participants have been held entitled, even if the modification is lawful. In effect the defendant is arguing that okay, we screwed our participants unlawfully, but we could have screwed them lawfully, and that’s what we’ve now done by amending the

Juror No. 2 claimed that Juror No. 1 had threatened her with a "fork" and later vowed to "cut" her.

Juror No. 2 told the judge that "I feel I'm not safe" as a result of taunts by the eight other members of the jury.

Counsel for Exxon agreed to excuse Juror No. 2 but also moved to

Public unions claimed that the Governor of Connecticut ran roughshod over their members' first amendment right to . . . join a union. They alleged that the Constitution State's chief executive used budget cuts and state-wide layoffs in 2003 as cover for firing 2,800 workers solely because they belonged to unions that refused to accept