Employee Ownership Legal Digest (11) Archive

Corey Rosen

November 15, 2023

Supreme Court Denies ESOP Arbitration Appeal in Harrison Case

On October 10, the Supreme Court, without comment, denied an effort to hear an appeal of a 10th Circuit decision to deny arbitration in an ESOP case. In Harrison v. Envision Management Holding Company, No. 22-1098 (10th Cir. Apr. 11, 2023), the 10th Circuit denied a request that it reconsider its earlier three-judge ruling that Envision Management Holding Company cannot compel arbitration in a case concerning the price an ESOP paid for shares in the company.

Continue Reading about Supreme Court Denies ESOP Arbitration Appeal in Harrison Case

Corey Rosen

November 15, 2023

Supreme Court Declines ESOP Arbitration Case Review

On October 16, the Supreme Court denied a request to allow arbitration in another ESOP case. In Henry v. Wilmington Trust et al., No. C.A. 19-1925 DM (D.C. Del. June 30, 2023), a district court ruled that a plaintiff (Henry) was not subject to an arbitration clause in the company’s ESOP.

Continue Reading about Supreme Court Declines ESOP Arbitration Case Review

Corey Rosen

October 11, 2023

Triad Manufacturing ESOP Case Settlement Approved

In Smith v. Greatbanc Trust, No. 20 C 2350 (D. Ill. Aug. 22, 2023), a district court gave final approval to a $14.8 million settlement involving an ESOP at Triad Manufacturing.

Continue Reading about Triad Manufacturing ESOP Case Settlement Approved

Corey Rosen

October 11, 2023

Settlement Reached in RVR ESOP Case

In Walsh v. Reliance Trust Co., et al., No. CV-19-03178-PHX-JJT (D.C. Ariz. Aug. 30, 2023), a district court approved a $22.5 million consent decree in the case of RVR, Inc. The case originated in a 2019 lawsuit alleging that Reliance Trust allowed an ESOP to overpay for the shares of RVR, Inc.

Continue Reading about Settlement Reached in RVR ESOP Case

Corey Rosen

October 11, 2023

Selling Shareholders Dismissed from Morton Buildings ESOP Case

In Lysengen v. Argent Trust, et al., No. 1:20-cv-01177MMM-JEH (D.C. Ill. Sept. 7, 2023), former shareholders of Morton Buildings were dismissed as defendants in a case concerning the valuation of their shares in a sale to the company’s ESOP.

Continue Reading about Selling Shareholders Dismissed from Morton Buildings ESOP Case

Corey Rosen

September 11, 2023

Employee Can Sue on Behalf of Plan in ESOP Case

In Lysengen v. Argent Trust, et al., No. 1:20-cv-01177-MMM-JEH (D.C. Ill. Aug. 10, 2023) an individual plaintiff was allowed to sue on behalf of the ESOP trust. The case involved the alleged overvaluation of stock at Morton Buildings.

Continue Reading about Employee Can Sue on Behalf of Plan in ESOP Case

Corey Rosen

September 11, 2023

Arbitration Clause Not Binding in ESOP Case

In David Burnett, et al., v. Prudent Fiduciary Services LLC, et al., No. 22-270-RGA (3rd Cir. August 15, 2023), the 3rd Circuit affirmed a lower court ruling that an arbitration clause does not apply in an ESOP case.

Continue Reading about Arbitration Clause Not Binding in ESOP Case

Corey Rosen

September 11, 2023

KPC Settlement

In our previous discussion of the settlement in the KPC Healthcare ESOP, we noted that the plaintiffs pointed to a sharp drop in the company’s stock price after the ESOP.

Continue Reading about KPC Settlement

Corey Rosen

September 11, 2023

Raytheon Defeats Bid to Reopen United Technologies Stock Plan Lawsuit

In Darnis v. Raytheon Techs. Corp., 22-2861-cv (2nd Cir. Aug. 3, 2023), the 2nd Circuit denied an effort by employees who had received equity compensation awards when United Technologies was sold to Raytheon in 2020.

Continue Reading about Raytheon Defeats Bid to Reopen United Technologies Stock Plan Lawsuit

Corey Rosen

September 11, 2023

IRS proposed changes to forfeiture rules

The proposed regulations would “clarify that forfeitures arising in any defined contribution plan (including in a money purchase pension plan) may be used for one or more of the following purposes, as specified in the plan: (1) to pay plan administrative expenses, (2) to reduce employer contributions under the plan, or (3) to increase benefits in other participants’ accounts in accordance with plan terms.”

Continue Reading about IRS proposed changes to forfeiture rules