Pizzella v. Vinoskey (II)

BVLaw
Full Text of Court Cases
January 29, 2020
5084 Industrial Machinery and Equipment
423830 Industrial Machinery and Equipment Merchant Wholesalers
ESOP valuations
expert testimony, breach of fiduciary duty, fair market value (FMV), overpayment, employee stock ownership plan (ESOP), adequate consideration

Pizzella v. Vinoskey (II)
2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15464; 2020 WL 476669
US
Federal Court
Federal
United States District Court
Dana Messina (plaintiff/DOL); Frank (“Chip”) Brown, Howard Kaplan (defendants/trustee and owner)
Moon

Summary

District court denies trustee’s motion for a new trial based on argument that Secretary of Labor lacked authority to pursue monetary relief against defendants; court says the plain language of the statute on which the DOL’s claims are based allows secretary to obtain damages on behalf of the ESOP.
Pizzella v. Vinoskey
PDF, Size: 168 KB

See Also

Trustee’s Post-Trial Attack on DOL’s Pursuit of Monetary Relief on Plan’s Behalf Crumbles

District court denies trustee’s motion for a new trial based on argument that Secretary of Labor lacked authority to pursue monetary relief against defendants; court says the plain language of the statute on which the DOL’s claims are based allows secretary to obtain damages on behalf of the ESOP.