Rankin v. Rots

How courts have described this case

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

• declining to rely on the ESOP presumption because whether the defendants breached their fiduciary obligations required the development of the facts of the case, and plaintiff stated a claim in that respect
• allegation that defendants had “de facto discretionary authority to change investment options within the Plan” held to be sufficient
• differences between fraud and breaches of fiduciary duty actions create lesser pleading standard for latter type of case
• “There simply are factual issues implicit in section 404(c), including whether or not a participant actually exercised independent control with respect to a transaction. Dismissal is not appropriate.”
• \Defendants' duty to `disclose or abstain' under the securities law does not immunize them from a claim that they failed in their conduct as ERISA fiduciaries\ (citation omitted)
• “Defendants had a duty under securities laws not to make any material misrepresentations; they also had a duty to disseminate truthful information to plan participants, including the information contained in SEC filings.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

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

• Langbecker v. Electronic Data Systems Corp.
  Fifth Circuit· 2007-01-18· cited 98×
• Wright v. Oregon Metallurgical Corp.
  Ninth Circuit· 2004-03-11· cited 77×
• Edgar v. Avaya, Inc.
  Third Circuit· 2007-09-26· cited 71×
• Raymond Pfeil v. State Street Bank and Trust Co
  Sixth Circuit· 2012-02-22· cited 59×
• In re Broadwing, Inc. Erisa Litigation
  S.D. Ohio· 2006-10-05· cited 36×
• In Re Sprint Corp. ERISA Litigation
  D. Kansas· 2004-05-27· cited 34×
• In Re Morgan Stanley Erisa Litigation
  S.D. New York· 2009-12-09· cited 33×
• Howell v. Motorola, Inc.
  N.D. Illinois· 2004-09-23· cited 19×
• Woods v. Southern Co.
  N.D. Georgia· 2005-10-04· cited 19×
• In Re Ferro Corp. Erisa Litigation
  N.D. Ohio· 2006-03-21· cited 19×
• Harris v. Koenig
  District of Columbia· 2009-03-12· cited 16×
• In Re Xerox Corp. Erisa Litigation
  D. Connecticut· 2007-04-17· cited 15×
• In Re Ford Motor Co. ERISA Litigation
  E.D. Michigan· 2008-12-22· cited 14×
• In Re Regions Morgan Keegan Erisa Litigation
  W.D. Tennessee· 2010-03-09· cited 12×
• In Re McKesson HBOC, Inc. ERISA Litigation
  N.D. California· 2005-09-09· cited 12×
• In Re RadioShack Corp. ERISA Litigation
  N.D. Texas· 2008-03-31· cited 11×
• Carlson v. Northrop Grumman Corp.
  N.D. Illinois· 2016-07-11· cited 11×
• In Re Syncor ERISA Litigation
  C.D. California· 2006-01-11· cited 3×
• Richard Wright v. Oregon Metallurgical Corporation
  Ninth Circuit· 2004-03-11· cited 1×
• Maxwell v. Radioshack Corp.
  N.D. Texas· 2008-03-31· cited 1×

Other cases named Rankin v. Rots

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• Rankin v. Rots
  E.D. Michigan· 2004-04-16· cited 33×