E.D. Michigan· 4/16/2004

Rankin v. Rots

Citations

220 F.R.D. 511
32 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2124
2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6585
2004 WL 831124

How courts have described this case

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

finding that the fact that notice of proposed Kmart class action settlement elicited objections from only approximately 0.002% of the class translated into “overwhelmingly] support[]” of the settlement.
holding that a named plaintiff and former employee in a class action had standing because she was seeking recovery on behalf of the plan as well as herself and that “damages will presumably flow to the Plan and in turn, to class members, including Rankin”
observing that adjudication of defendant’s liability for breach of fiduciary duty would “likely be dispositive of the claims of other potential class members”
finding typicality where, “[although there may be factual differences as to whether, in the case of voluntary employee contributions, a class member relied on any alleged misrepresentations, the ... misrepresentations are alleged to have been made to the entire class of participants”
“The fact that [plaintiff] did not voluntarily invest in ... stock is a minor distinction in relation to the overarching question of whether defendants violated their fiduciary duties under ERISA.”
“Typicality may exist where there is a very strong similarity of legal theories, even if substantial factual distinctions exist between the named and unnamed class members.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cohn

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this 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.