Employer Stock Litigation

By: Ronald Kramer , Megan Troy and Sam Schwartz-Fenwick

On Friday, in Taylor v. KeyCorp, Nos. 10-4163, -4198, -4199, (6th Cir. May 25, 2012), the Sixth Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal in an ERISA stock-drop case, holding the remaining proposed named class plaintiff lacked standing because she could not establish an “injury in

By: Ian Morrison, Meg Troy and Sam Schwartz-Fenwick

On May 8, 2012, the Eleventh and Second Circuits affirmed two district court dismissals of “stock drop” cases at the pleadings stage, joining the long line of recent decisions that demonstrate skepticism towards stock drop claims.  We have reported on some of those decisions here and

By: Amanda Sonneborn and John Duke

Continuing the trend observed throughout 2011, the Southern District of Indiana granted defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint in DeWald v. Zimmer Holdings, Inc., Case No. 1:09-cv-00745 (S.D. Ind. Dec. 23, 2011), a typical stock drop complaint alleging that defendants violated ERISA by continuing to offer employer stock

By:  Amanda Sonneborn and Meg Troy

In the first case to rely substantially on Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S.Ct. 2541 (2011), to deny class certification in a putative ERISA class action, the Northern District of Illinois recently rejected the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification of a stock drop claim.  In Groussman et

By: Ian Morrison and Sam Schwartz-Fenwick

Joining at least the Third, Fifth, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits, in finding a presumption of prudence attaches when defined contribution plans offer employer stock as an investment option, a divided panel of the Second Circuit today affirmed the dismissal of ERISA “stock drop” claims against Citigroup in In re:

By: Ian Morrison, Nadir Ahmed and Sam Schwartz-Fenwick

Recently, many courts have dismissed ERISA “stock drop” cases at the pleadings stage, finding plaintiffs’ allegations insufficient to overcome the presumption of prudence which many courts find applies to the decision to offer qualifying employer securities as a plan investment option.  In the face of recent dismissals,

By:  Ronald Kramer, Alexis Hawley and Sam Schwartz-Fenwick

On September 6, 2011, in In re Nokia ERISA Litigation (Case No. 1:10-cv-03306-GBD), the Southern District of New York dismissed a class action complaint alleging breach of fiduciary duty claims based on defendants’ decision to continue to offer Nokia Corp. stock as an investment option under