Tibble v. Edison International

• Article

• Talk

Tibble v. Edison International, 575 U.S. 523 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that "because a fiduciary normally has a continuing duty to monitor investments and remove imprudent ones, a plaintiff may allege that a fiduciary breached a duty of prudence by failing to properly monitor investments and remove imprudent ones. Such a claim is timely as long it is filed within six years of the alleged breach of continuing duty."[1]

Opinion of the Court

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tibble_v._Edison_International&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: Opinion of the Court")

Associate Justice Stephen Breyer authored the unanimous opinion of the Court.[2]

References

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tibble_v._Edison_International&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: References")

1. ↑ "Tibble v. Edison International" .
2. ↑ "Tibble et al. v. Edison International et al" (PDF). United States Supreme Court . May 18, 2015. Archived from the original (PDF) on May 8, 2022.

External links

(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tibble_v._Edison_International&action=edit&section=3 "Edit section: External links")

• Text of Tibble v. Edison International, 575 U.S. 523 (2015) is available from: CourtListener Justia Oyez (oral argument audio) Supreme Court (slip opinion) (archived)

• SCOTUSblog coverage

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tibble_v._Edison_International&oldid=1330678758 "