Freund v. Marshall & Ilsley Bank

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that four seller trustees’ resignations were invalid and that they remained plan trustees after the date of 11 their purported resignations
• \[A court] is fully empowered to award the relief available in traditional trust law against non-fiduciaries who knowingly participate ... in a breach of trust.\
• manner in which plan document is distributed may also indicate whether plan is a retirement plan for employees
• even if, for the sake of argument, the transition rule applies, a trustee must conform with the basic fiduciary responsibility rules
• “[A court] is fully empowered to award the relief available in traditional trust law against non-fiduciaries who knowingly participate ... in a breach of trust.”
• section 406(b) generally prohibits \any fiduciary from acting in a situation in which he has a personal interest which may conflict with the interest of the plan for which he acts\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).