The plaintiff in the case asked the court to to answer “whether Dudenhoeffer’s ‘context-sensitive scrutiny of a complaint’s allegations’ can be met where a court" makes certain presumptions.
The bottom line was, “Absent extraordinary circumstances, ERISA’s duty of prudence requires an ESOP fiduciary to publicly disclose inside information only when the securities laws require such disclosure.”
The complaint says Boeing should have warned defined contribution plan participant invested in the company's stock that issues the company was having caused the stock price to be...
A 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision reversed the company’s District Court win in a lawsuit alleging imprudence in managing company stock investments in one of its...
After giving plaintiffs a second chance at offering alternative action Exxon could have taken, the court again found the suggested action was something plan fiduciaries could believe would...
The case ascended on appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, where it also flatly failed to meet the high hurdles for proving...
The lawsuit contends the plan’s holdings of the parent company's common stock should have been liquidated on or shortly after the date Gannett was separated from its parent.
Relying on standards set forth by the Supreme Court in Fifth Third Bank v. Dudenhoeffer, an appellate court affirmed a district court’s dismissal of the case.
The 9th Circuit ruled that a prudent fiduciary in the same circumstances as the defendants could view the proposed alternative course of action regarding company stock in Hewlett-Packard's...