Legal Opinion
Amgen Inc. v. Harris
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided January 25, 2016No. 15-278PublishedCited by 47 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*758 PER CURIAM.
The Court considers for the second time the Ninth Circuit's determination that respondent stockholders' complaint states a claim against petitioner fiduciaries for breach of the duty of prudence. The first time, the Court vacated and remanded in light of Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer, 573 U.S. ----, 134 S.Ct. 2459 , 189 L.Ed.2d 457 (2014), a case which set forth the standards for stating a claim for breach of the duty of prudence against fiduciaries who manage employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs). On remand, the Ninth Circuit reiterated its conclusion that the complaint…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Fifth Third Bancorp v. DudenhoefferSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Harris v. Amgen, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2014
- Steve Harris v. Amgen, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2013
- Amgen Inc. v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
3Cited by47 opinions
- The Depot, Inc. v. Caring for Montanans, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2019
- Allen v. Greatbanc Trust Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2016
- Laura Divane v. Northwestern UniversityCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2020
- Rinehart ex rel. Buzzo v. Lehman Bros. Holdings Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2016
- Ralph Whitley v. BP, P.L.C.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2016
42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.