Novosel v. Azcon Inc.

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
January 9, 2023
5093 Scrap and Waste Materials
562920 Materials Recovery Facilities
ESOP valuations
accounting, valuation date, employee stock ownership plan (ESOP), settlement, paycheck protection program (PPP)

Novosel v. Azcon Inc.
2023 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3336; 2023 WL 130494
US
Federal Court
Illinois
United States District Court
Rebecca R. Pallmeyer

Summary

In this ESOP-related case, the plaintiff (an ESOP plan beneficiary) raised three complaints, two of which were primarily the result of the performance and use by the ESOP of an interim valuation date for measurement of the value of her shares for her retirement payments made over time. There was also discussion regarding the interim value determined and whether a PPP loan of $1.2 million should have been considered. The defendants moved for dismissal on the first two accounts. The court denied the dismissal of the first complaint in regard to assertions that the use of the interim valuation date was arbitrary and capricious. It also allowed the filing by the plaintiff of a second amended complaint. The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint regarding the asserted cutback of accrued benefits.
Novosel v Azcon Inc
PDF, Size: 188 KB

See Also

ESOP Case Motions Revolve Primarily Around an Interim Valuation and Consideration of a PPP Loan

In this ESOP-related case, the plaintiff (an ESOP plan beneficiary) raised three complaints, two of which were primarily the result of the performance and use by the ESOP of an interim valuation date for measurement of the value of her shares for her retirement payments made over time. There was also discussion regarding the interim value determined and whether a PPP loan of $1.2 million should have been considered. The defendants moved for dismissal on the first two accounts. The court denied the dismissal of the first complaint in regard to assertions that the use of the interim valuation date was arbitrary and capricious. It also allowed the filing by the plaintiff of a second amended complaint. The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint regarding the asserted cutback of accrued benefits.