Search for: "Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer" Results 1 - 20 of 87
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
28 Jan 2023, 7:32 am
 Pix Credit hereESG, has been driven by the private sector and intensely debated in the context of privately ordered responsible business conduct standards, and formed part of a rich debates among market actors and public international organizations about the role and nature of so-called non-financial siclosure in genmeral, and sustainability and climate related factors in decision making. [read post]
12 Oct 2021, 2:14 pm by Kevin LaCroix
Supreme Court, which is much more conservative now than when it heard the Fifth Third Bank case (Fifth Third Bancorp v. [read post]
12 May 2021, 8:08 pm by John Elwood
Wells Fargo & Co., 20-866Issues: (1) Whether, under Fifth Third Bancorp v Dudenhoeffer, fiduciaries of an employee stock ownership fund are effectively immune from duty-of-prudence liability for the failure to publicly disclose inside information; and (2) whether Dudenhoeffer’s framework extends beyond prudence-based claims and applies to duty-of-loyalty claims against ESOP fiduciaries. [read post]
29 Apr 2021, 1:19 pm by John Elwood
Wells Fargo & Co., 20-866Issues: (1) Whether, under Fifth Third Bancorp v Dudenhoeffer, fiduciaries of an employee stock ownership fund are effectively immune from duty-of-prudence liability for the failure to publicly disclose inside information; and (2) whether Dudenhoeffer’s framework extends beyond prudence-based claims and applies to duty-of-loyalty claims against ESOP fiduciaries. [read post]
22 Jan 2021, 10:36 am by Andrew Hamm
Wells Fargo & Co. 20-866Issues: (1) Whether, under Fifth Third Bancorp v Dudenhoeffer, fiduciaries of an employee stock ownership fund are effectively immune from duty-of-prudence liability for the failure to publicly disclose inside information; and (2) whether Dudenhoeffer’s framework extends beyond prudence-based claims and applies to duty-of-loyalty claims against ESOP fiduciaries. [read post]
13 Dec 2020, 4:00 pm by Suzanne E. Meeker
Because these arguments concerned the interaction between the duties of plan fiduciaries under ERISA and the duties of corporate insiders under the securities laws, and the Court had previously indicated that the SEC’s views could be relevant to construing ERISA’s duty of prudence in this context (in Fifth Third Bancorp v. [read post]
14 Jan 2020, 12:55 pm by Cassandra Maas
The question presented in this case primarily concerned whether the “more harm than good” pleading standard, established in 2013 by the Supreme Court ruling in Fifth Third Bancorp v. [read post]