Supreme Court· 1/25/2016

Amgen Inc. v. Harris

Citations

136 S. Ct. 758
193 L. Ed. 2d 696
2016 U.S. LEXIS 891
25 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 609
61 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1109

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

noting that, although it may be true that removing a stock fund from the list of investment options may have been an alternative option for the defendants, the facts and allegations supporting that proposition should appear in the complaint
applying Fifth Third Bancorp and explaining that courts must assess whether a complaint “has plausibly alleged that a prudent fiduciary in the same position could not have concluded that the alternative action would do more harm than good.”
proper allocation of § 408 burden waived by plaintiffs by not raising at trial
dismissal appropriate \[w]hen an affirmative defense is 9 obvious on the face of a complaint\
“Fifth Third [ v. Dudenhoeffer] therefore laid out [the 12(b)(6) ] standards to help ‘divide the plausible sheep from the merit-less goats.... ’ ”
proper allocation of § 408 burden waived by plaintiffs by not raising at trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Per Curiam

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

29 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Amgen Inc. v. Harris

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.