In a Primarily Procedural Ruling, the Michigan Court of Appeals Affirms a Damages Award Including Goodwill
In this primarily procedural ruling, the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed judgment from a lower court awarding damages, including goodwill, for breach of contract arising from a sale of a medical practice, including goodwill. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants’ failure to comply with the transfer assistant clauses in the sale contract destroyed the practice goodwill, among other things.
Sherman v. Sherrod
In this primarily procedural ruling, the Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed judgment from a lower court awarding damages, including goodwill, for breach of contract arising from a sale of a medical practice, including goodwill. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants’ failure to comply with the transfer assistant clauses in the sale contract destroyed the practice goodwill, among other things.
Malpractice Insurer Not Required to Defend Valuation Firm for Claim Alleging Securities Fraud
This case featured a motion to dismiss a claim from an insured that the plaintiff, Great American, was required to defend the defendant, Stout, against a claim by ESOP plaintiffs that Stout committed “federal securities fraud.” While the Great American policy covered valuation services, the policy also featured an exclusion for claims against the insured for securities violations.
Great Am. Fid. Ins. Co. v. Stout Risius Ross, Inc.
This case featured a motion to dismiss a claim from an insured that the plaintiff, Great American, was required to defend the defendant, Stout, against a claim by ESOP plaintiffs that Stout committed “federal securities fraud.” While the Great American policy covered valuation services, the policy also featured an exclusion for claims against the insured for securities violations.
Lysengen v. Argent Trust Co.
ESOP plaintiff’s proposed class action against trustee and selling shareholders survives motion to dismiss; court says complaint gave enough facts to support claims of overpayment and breach of fiduciary duty; defendant must show disputed transaction falls into adequate consideration exemption.
ESOP Plaintiff’s Proposed Class Action Alleging Overpayment Survives Motion to Dismiss
ESOP plaintiff’s proposed class action against trustee and selling shareholders survives motion to dismiss; court says complaint gave enough facts to support claims of overpayment and breach of fiduciary duty; defendant must show disputed transaction falls into adequate consideration exemption.
Court Finds ESOP Trustee’s Insurance Excludes Coverage for Defense Against DOL’s ERISA Claims
In bifurcated ESOP litigation centering on ERISA violations, court finds trustee defendants’ professional liability policy expressly excluded coverage for ERISA claims; under language of policy, insurer is not required to defend or indemnify trustee defendants fighting DOL’s ERISA allegations.
Gemini Ins. Co. v. Potts
In bifurcated ESOP litigation centering on ERISA violations, court finds trustee defendants’ professional liability policy expressly excluded coverage for ERISA claims; under language of policy, insurer is not required to defend or indemnify trustee defendants fighting DOL’s ERISA allegations.
New DOL process agreement confronts control issue in ESOP valuations
The Department of Labor recently settled ESOP litigation with the trustee Farmers National Bank of Danville (FNB).
DOL Processing Agreement Contains Stringent Rules on Controlling Interest Transactions, Indemnification
Under new processing agreement between DOL and specific ESOP trustee, trustee is bound by strict rules on how to handle controlling-interest acquisitions and indemnification issues; trustee must ensure ESOP plan acquires a series of specified rights before approving payment of a control premium.
Scalia v. Farmers National Bank of Danville & Weddle Bros. Const. Co.
Under new processing agreement between DOL and specific ESOP trustee, trustee is bound by strict rules on how to handle controlling-interest acquisitions and indemnification issues; trustee must ensure ESOP plan acquires a series of specified rights before approving payment of a control premium.
ESOP defendants sue for indemnification to limit financial exposure
In the face of several key rulings against ESOP fiduciaries, ESOP defendants, concerned about incurring substantial financial obligations, have begun to pursue claims for indemnification and/or contribution against other defendants or third parties to limit their exposure, as a recent case illustrates.
Acosta v. Reliance Trust Co.
In DOL’s overpayment case against company directors and ESOP trustee, court denies directors’ pretrial motion for dismissal of case, finding DOL advanced “plausible” case theories; court also finds ESOP defendants have no right to indemnification from estate of late owner/seller of company shares.
In ‘Overpriced ESOP Insider Transaction Case,’ Defendants’ Pretrial Motion for Indemnification Fails
In DOL’s overpayment case against company directors and ESOP trustee, court denies directors’ pretrial motion for dismissal of case, finding DOL advanced “plausible” case theories; court also finds ESOP defendants have no right to indemnification from estate of late owner/seller of company shares.