Chao, Elaine L. v. Day, Brittian P.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an insurance company president was a fiduciary when he promised to use plan funds to purchase insurance policies but instead \pilfered\ the funds and provided fake policies
• clarifying that fiduciary status is not extended to every person who exercises “mere possession, or custody” over plan assets
• noting that when Congress bifurcated a subsection with the “parallel inclusion of the verb ‘exercises’ at the beginning of each clause” this was evidence of Congress’s intent to avoid “commingling]” of the “textually distinct provisions of the two clauses”
• defendant that received plan assets for purposes of purchasing insurance policies was a fiduciary under Section 1002(21)(A)(i) when he kept the money and provided fake insurance policies

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).