Stevens v. Meier

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiff met burden by alleging a drop in stock price, a loan from sellers rather than an outside entity, and a high interest rate
• holding that exemptions to prohibited transactions under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act are affirmative defenses that a plaintiff need not address in his or her complaint
• noting a “post-ESOP transaction 28 decline in stock value” is relevant when evaluating plausibility of claims at motion to dismiss stage
• “ERISA plaintiffs generally lack the inside information necessary to make out their claims in detail unless and until discovery commences.”
• “fundamentally, an ERISA plaintiff need not plead the absence of exemptions to prohibited transactions.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).