Loomis v. Exelon Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “nothing in ERISA requires every fiduciary to scour the market to find and offer the cheapest possible fund (which might, of course, be plagued by other problems)”
• noting there was “no reason to think [the defendant] chose these funds to enrich itself at participants’ expense”
• noting there was “no reason to think [the defendant] chose these funds to enrich itself at participants’ expense”
• noting there was “no reason to think [the defendant] chose these funds to enrich itself at participants’ expense”
• finding no claim where Defendants “offered participants a menu that includes high-expense, high-risk, and potentially high-return funds, together with low-expense, low-risk, modest-return bond funds”
• rejecting the argument that ERISA’s fiduciary duties require employers to shoulder the costs of administering funds themselves

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).