573 U.S. 409 (2014) Cited 303 times 61 Legal Analyses
Holding that a motion to dismiss in an ERISA case "requires careful judicial consideration of whether the complaint states a claim that the defendant has acted imprudently" and declining to adopt a defendant-friendly presumption
Holding that “ERISA imposes three general duties on pension plan fiduciaries”: to “discharge their duties with ‘prudence’ ”; to “diversify investments to ‘minimize the risk of large losses' ”; and to “act ‘solely in the interest of the participants' and for the ‘exclusive purpose’ of providing benefits to those participants.” (quoting 29 U.S.C. § 1104(a) )
Granting summary judgment against a claim that an ERISA fiduciary was imprudent "[i]n the wake of the 2007-2008 financial crisis" by allocating a stable value fund's assets "away from higher-return, but higher-risk sectors ... and toward treasuries and other cash-like or shorter duration investments," id. at 4
745 F. Supp. 2d 386 (S.D.N.Y. 2010) Cited 77 times
Holding that where a defendant “was under a duty to update or correct [a prior misrepresentation] ... Plaintiffs are entitled to the Affiliated Ute presumption of reliance on this omission”
Holding "[m]utual funds . . . have a variety of unique regulatory and transparency features that make it an apples-to-oranges comparison to judge them against" investment alternatives "such as 'commingled pools'"