Employee Ownership Legal Digest (20) Archive

Stay informed on the latest legal developments impacting employee ownership. This page provides timely and concise summaries of key cases and rulings, contributed by experienced attorneys, to help the entire employee ownership community understand their implications, and also offers access to NCEO's archive of prior content.

Corey Rosen

Class Certified in Segerdahl ESOP Sale

In Rush v. GreatBanc, No. 19-cv-00738 (N.D. Ill., June 16, 2021), a district court granted class status to the plaintiff, saying that he could represent the class of participants in an ESOP at Segerdahl Corporation. The company was 100% ESOP owned until sold in 2016. Rush, who was a vice president at the time, contends that the board should have sought a higher bid. The defendants claim that Rush had a conflict of interest in that he sold $1.8 million in stock appreciation rights in the sale, knew about the proposed transaction, and was not typical of the class of plan participants. The court ruled that there were sufficient common interests of the class relative to how much the company was sold for to allow the case to continue.

Right-pointing arrow Continue Reading

Corey Rosen

Ninth Circuit Allows Current ESOP Trustee to Continue Claim Against former ESOP Trustee

In Wong v. Flynn-Kerper, No. 19-56289 (9th Cir., June 7, 2021), the Ninth Circuit overrode a lower court dismissal of a case in which plaintiffs sought to recover an alleged overpayment to the late Bernard Kerper from his widow. Kerper was the former trustee of an ESOP at Anaplex. David Wong is the current trustee for the Anaplex plan. Wong argued that Kerper caused an improper valuation through accounting fraud, including not counting debt owed by Kerper to the company for $1 million, roughly the amount Wong charges the ESOP overpaid. Kerper also failed to disclose an ongoing EPA investigation that would result in substantial costs to Anaplex.

Right-pointing arrow Continue Reading

Corey Rosen

Wilmington Trust Settlement Approval in Nation Safe Drivers Suit Approved

In Fink v. Wilmington Trust, NA, No. 1:19-cv-01193 (D-Del., motion for settlement approval June 8, 2021), Wilmington Trust NA agreed to pay $5.5 million to settle a proposed class action challenging Wilmington’s right in approving a 2014 $342 million transaction for an ESOP to purchase Nation Safe Drivers Corporation. The deal would provide an average of over $25,000 for about 215 people with vested account balances in the Nation Safe ESOP, with payments of $50 each for the 82 unvested plan participants.

Right-pointing arrow Continue Reading

Corey Rosen

Wilmington Trust Can Proceed on One Claim Against Valuation Firm

Wilmington Tr., N.A. v. Stout Risius Ross, Inc., No. 20 Civ. 2505 (S.D. NY, March 23, 2021). The lawsuit revolves around Stout’s role as the appraiser in Brundle v. Wilmington Trust, No. 17-1873 (4th Cir., March 21, 2019), which ended up in a $29.8 million judgment against Wilmington Trust over its role in the ESOP at Constellis. Wilmington sued Stout for breach of contract, negligence, and contribution over its decisions as the appraiser in the case. 

Right-pointing arrow Continue Reading

Corey Rosen

Edison wins stock drop case

In Wilson v. Craver, No. 18-56139 (9th Cir, April 19, 2021), the 9th Circuit Court upheld a lower court ruling that the plaintiff did not state a plausible course of alternative action Edison Electric executives could have taken that would have done more good than harm in a case involving a drop in Edison’s stock value in the company’s ESOP.

Right-pointing arrow Continue Reading

Corey Rosen

Settlement Terms in IBM Case Revealed

Settlement terms in the long-running stock-drop case Retirement Plans Committee of IBM v. Jander et al., No. 18-165 (U.S., Jan. 14, 2020) have been revealed. IBM admitted no wrongdoing and the plaintiffs agreed to release all future claims. IBM agreed to pay $4.75 million into a qualified settlement fund. The funds will be distributed by an independent administrator among the IBM ESOP participants and beneficiaries and plaintiff attorneys.

Right-pointing arrow Continue Reading

Corey Rosen

Court Allows Insurer to Proceed with Claims It Does Not Have to Defend or Indemnify ESOP Appraisal Firm

In Great American Fidelity Insurance Company v. Stout Risius Ross, Inc. et al, No. 2:19-cv-11294 (E.D. Mi, March 4, 2021), a district court allowed Great American Insurance Company to proceed with claims it does not have to defend or indemnify the ESOP appraisal firm Stout Risius Ross over allegations about its valuation work for Appvion, an ESOP company that went bankrupt. All of the federal claims under ERISA have been dismissed in the case, but state securities laws claims are still being litigated.   

Right-pointing arrow Continue Reading

Corey Rosen

Starkey ESOP Case Settled

In Beck v. Austin, No. 19-CV-1453 (D.C., Minn., March 12, 2021), a court approved a $173,000 settlement against various defendants, including the CEO, of Starkey Laboratories, a hearing aid manufacturer. Defendants were accused of fraud against the company between at least 2006 and 2015, siphoning off $30 million in cash and harming the ESOP through the issuance of restricted stock to themselves, dramatically reducing the ESOP’s ownership of the company. Starkey hired an outside trustee to help reach an initial settlement agreement, which eventually paid the ESOP $800,000. Defendants claimed that released them from all claims, but the court allowed further litigation to resolve other issues, which this settlement resolved. Starkey has about 4,000 employees.

Right-pointing arrow Continue Reading

Corey Rosen

Mixed Decision in ESOP Valuation Case

In Stewart v. Saakvitne, No. 18-00155 SOM-WRP, (D. Haw., March 12, 2021), a district court denied summary judgment to former members of the board of directors of an ESOP firm, Bowers + Kubota, over an ESOP valuation case. The court also denied a DOL claim that the two individuals could be considered plan fiduciaries prior to their formally adopting a decision to proceed with the plan and hire an outside fiduciary (that fiduciary has since deceased). The court also denied a DOL claim concerning the validity of an indemnification provision for the board members because the DOL did not show they actually benefitted from it. Finally, the court ruled that the directors could be held accountable as fiduciaries if at trial they are shown to have inadequately monitored or improperly influenced the trustee concerning the valuation.  

Right-pointing arrow Continue Reading