Among other things, the plaintiff alleges the plan committee ignored the numerous warning signs that Chesapeake was an imprudent investment for retirement assets, and allowed the plan to invest more than 44% of its assets in this one stock.
For claims alleging a fiduciary breach based on non-public information, the high court has held that plaintiffs must plausibly allege an alternative action fiduciaries could have taken and would not have viewed as more harmful to the plan than helpful.
The underlying stock drop litigation had already seen multiple rulings from a New York district court and the 2nd Circuit.
According to both district and appellate court rulings, the ESOP fiduciaries knowingly offered the employer stock at an inflated price.
This is the question in a petition before the Supreme Court in a case involving a leveraged buyout of an ESOP.
The U.S. Department of Labor is suing the fiduciaries of a Vermont employee stock ownership plan for violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.
To appreciate the riskiness of a stock intimately involves its market valuation, and to argue that the ESOP fiduciaries should have been able to outguess the market’s valuation is inherently unfair absent special circumstance, such as fraud.
The fiduciaries did not follow terms of the plan document when paying out participants upon plan termination, a federal court found.
Wells Fargo faces a third ERISA stock drop lawsuit in the U. S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.
This is a friendly reminder that 2017 PLANSPONSOR Retirement Plan Sponsor of the Year nomination forms are still available. Don't wait to nominate—time is running out!
The owner of Sentry Equipment Erectors, Inc. sold his shares to the plan at $406 per share, much greater than prices at which participants had previously sold their shares.
Another participant in a Wells Fargo retirement plan is accusing the bank of breaching its fiduciary duty in the management of company stock offered as a retirement plan investment option.
The judge noted that the “right to a particular form of investment (e.g., investment in employer stock or securities)” is not a protected benefit under the IRC anti-cutback provision.
A federal judge ruled the lead plaintiff does not have standing to bring his claim because he never purchased or sold ADRs of Sanofi during the alleged period of artificial price inflation.
An appellate court has sent the case back to a lower court after finding that BP's ESOP participants did not meet all pleading standards set by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Employees of Antioch sued the company over a transaction to make the ESOP 100% employee-owned years before the company filed bankruptcy.
Key aspects of the ERISA-based complaint are back under consideration in light of the Supreme Court's 2014 decision in Fifth-Third Bancorp vs. Dudenhoeffer.
Terms of Conco Inc.'s reorganization plan do not allow ESOP participants to sell shares to a third party, a court found.
The recent judgement against AIT Laboratories adds nearly $3.5 million to previous collections, now totaling more than $7 million.
An appellate court agreed with a lower court that the fiduciaries failed to act in participants’ best interest and to monitor providers.