Legal Opinion
Acosta v. Pacific Enterprises
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided December 11, 1991No. 89-56170PublishedCited by 48 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
REINHARDT, Circuit Judge:
In this case, we consider the nature and scope of a plan trustee’s duty to provide information to an individual participant regarding other participants’ shareholdings under an employee benefit plan in the parent corporation. The specific question we must decide is whether a trustee of various employee benefit plans administered on behalf of a single parent company has a fiduciary duty under section 404(a) of ERISA to provide a list of the names, addresses, and shareholdings beneficially *615owned by each participant in those plans to an individual participant in one of…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Powell v. McCormackSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- United States Parole Commission v. GeraghtySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Southern Pacific Terminal Co. v. Interstate Commerce CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1911
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- Arthur Fallick v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company Nationwide Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
- The Depot, Inc. v. Caring for Montanans, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- Connie Edmonson v. Lincoln National Life InsurancCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2013
- Adamczyk v. Lever Bros. Co., Div. of ConopcoDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1997
- Haddock Ex Rel. Flyte Tool & Dye Co. v. Nationwide Financial Services Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2006
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.