Cosgrove v. Circle K Corp.
District Court, D. Arizona
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
ROLL, District Judge.
Pending before the Court are class plaintiffs’ and defendant Circle K Corp.’s (“Circle K”) cross-motions for summary judgment on the issue of whether Circle K was a fiduciary, as defined in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1002(21)(A), for the Fred Hervey Interests Employees’ Benefit Plan (“the Plan”) when it purchased certain real assets from the Plan. Also pending before the Court are cross-motions for summary judgment as to whether Karl Eller was a Plan fiduciary for ERISA purposes.
Relevant Facts
The facts relating to this ease are…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Mertens v. Hewitt AssociatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Braswell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- The Sommers Drug Stores Co. Employee Profit Sharing Trust, Cross-Appellant v. Corrigan Enterprises, Inc. And Walter N. Corrigan, Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1986
- John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance v. Harris Trust & Savings BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Donovan v. BierwirthCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Liss v. SmithDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1998
- In Re Dynegy, Inc. ERISA LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2004
- Keach v. U.S. Trust Co., N.A.District Court, C.D. Illinois · 2002
- In Re Reliant Energy ERISA LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2004
- Keach v. US TRUST CO., NADistrict Court, C.D. Illinois · 2002