Legal Opinion
Steinman v. Hicks
District Court, C.D. Illinois
Decided March 24, 2003No. 00-3260PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RICHARD MILLS, District Judge.
Under the circumstances, did Defendants breach their fiduciary duty under ERISA to Plaintiffs in continuing to invest 65% of the Moorman Profit Sharing Plan’s assets in Archer-Daniels-Midland common stock after the termination of the Plan?
No.
Summary judgment for Defendants.
I. BACKGROUND
On December 30,1997, the Archer-Daniels-Midland Company (“ADM”) acquired the Moorman Manufacturing Company (“MMC”) by merging MMC with a wholly-owned subsidiary of ADM. One year later, the wholly-owned subsidiary merged into ADM. ADM’s acquisition of MMC was structured as a…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Wright v. Oregon Metallurgical Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Vern Steinman, Floyd Sinclair, and Ron Eickelschulte, on Behalf of Themselves and Those Similarly Situated v. Teresa HicksCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2003
- Register v. Cameron & Barkley Co.District Court, D. South Carolina · 2006
- Richard Wright v. Oregon Metallurgical CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Bartnett v. Abbott LaboratoriesDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2020
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.