NEW YORK - Shareholders in a securities class action lawsuit have failed to plead any elements of scienter in making their federal securities law claims against a supplier of lightweighting and noise, vibration and harshness solutions for personal and commercial vehicles and certain of the executive officers, a federal judge in New York ruled March 23 in granting the defendants' motion to dismiss (Raymond Thomas, et al. v. Shiloh Industries Inc., et al., No. 15-7449, S.D. N.Y., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42512).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Whether a church establishes a plan or not, pension plans for religious nonprofits are and have been exempt from the minimum funding and reporting and disclosure requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, the attorney representing three religious hospitals and health care providers argued March 27 before the U.S. Supreme Court (Advocate Health Care Network, et al. v. Maria Stapleton, et al., No. 16-74, Saint Peter's Healthcare System, et al. v. Laurence Kaplan, No. 16-86, Dignity Health, et al. v. Starla Rollins, No. 16-258, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on March 27 agreed to hear a defense technology company's appeal of a Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals' ruling to determine if there is a split among the circuits regarding whether a duty to disclose is created by Item 303 of Securities and Exchange Commission Regulation S-K that is actionable under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Leidos Inc., v. Indiana Public Retirement System, et al., No. 16-581, U.S. Sup.).
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. - A man's Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) suit impermissibly seeks equitable relief in the face of other available remedies, a federal magistrate judge in Alabama held March 23 (Jeffrey Woodruff v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, et al., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41921).
BLUEFIELD, W.Va. - A West Virginia federal judge on March 23 refused to dismiss an insurer's declaratory judgment lawsuit challenging coverage for a lawsuit alleging that the insured's employee filed fraudulent tax returns, finding that the factors weigh in favor of the federal court retaining jurisdiction (Ohio Security Insurance Co. v. K R Enterprises, Inc., et al., No. 15-16264, S.D. W.Va., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 42011).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on March 27 agreed to hear a defense technology company's appeal of a Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals' ruling to determine if there is a split among the circuits regarding whether a duty to disclose is created by Item 303 of Securities and Exchange Commission Regulation S-K that is actionable under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Leidos Inc. v. Indiana Public Retirement System, et al., No. 16-581, U.S. Sup.).
SAN FRANCISCO - Health care centers designated to receive direct payment from a health plan administrator for medical services cannot file suit in federal court under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act because they lack both direct statutory authority and derivative authority through assignment under ERISA's civil enforcement provisions, a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held March 22 (DB Healthcare, LLC, et al. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Arizona, Inc., No. 14-16518, Advanced Women's Health Center, Inc. v. Anthem Blue Cross Life and Health Insurance Company, No. 14-16612, 9th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5082).
DALLAS - A Texas federal judge on March 20 denied a coalition of insurance associations' emergency motion for an injunction pending appeal of a ruling that the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has not exceeded its authority in formulating its new "fiduciary rule" and that the new rule does not violate the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, saying that the plaintiffs have not met their burden to satisfy four factors required to obtain an injunction pending appeal (Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, et al. v. Edward Hugler, Acting Secretary of Labor, et al., No. 3:16-cv-1476, consolidated with 3:16-cv-1530, 3:16-cv-1537, N.D. Texas, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39806).
PORTLAND, Ore. - Dismissal of a securities class action against a company and its board of directors for allegedly omitting key information in the Securities and Exchange Commission proxy statement for a proposed acquisition deal in an effort to have the company's stock sell for a lesser price is not proper because lead plaintiffs have shown that the proxy statement was both misleading and material, a federal judge in Oregon ruled March 20 in denying the defendants' motion to dismiss (Elia Azar, et al. v. Blount International Inc., et al., No. 16-483, D. Ore., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39493).
COLUMBUS, Ohio - An economic expert may opine as to whether the market in which a company's stock traded was efficient during a class period and whether it is possible to calculate damages on a classwide basis for purposes of liability, an Ohio federal judge ruled March 17 (Alan Willis v. Big Lots Inc., et al., No. 12-0604, S.D. Ohio, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38933).
NEWARK, N.J. - Three drug makers and the three largest pharmacy benefit managers have engaged in a pricing scheme to drive up the cost of diabetes insulin - by more than 150 percent in the last five years - in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, the Sherman Act and numerous state laws, four consumers and Type 1 Diabetes Defense Foundation allege in a March 17 class complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey (Julia Boss, et al. v. CVS Health Corporation, et al., No. 17-1823, D. N.J.).
CHARLOTTE, N.C. - Plaintiff employees in a decade-long case over a bank's illegal transfer of assets from a 401(k) plan to an Employee Retirement Income Security Act pension plan failed to show that any profit was retained by the bank as a result of the transfer, a North Carolina federal judge ruled March 17 in awarding judgment in favor of the bank on the plaintiffs' accounting-for-profit claim (William L. Pender, et al. v. Bank of America Corp., et al., No. 3:05-cv-00238, W.D. N.C., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38771).
COLUMBUS, Ohio - Class certification in a shareholder lawsuit against a broad line closeout retailer and certain of its executive officers is proper because the lead plaintiff in the action has met all statutory requirements needed for certification, a federal judge in Ohio ruled March 17 (Alan Willis v. Big Lots Inc., et al., No. 12-0604, S.D. Ohio, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38926).
CARSON CITY, Nev. - Nevada's Minimum Wage Amendment (MWA), which allows employers to pay a lower minimum wage if they provide health benefits, is not preempted by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) or the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) and is not unconstitutionally vague, the Nevada Supreme Court ruled March 16 (Western Cab Company v. The Eighth Judicial District Court of the State of Nevada, in and for the County of Clark, et al., No. 69408, Nev. Sup., 2017 Nev. LEXIS 16).
SANTA ANA, Calif. - Lead plaintiffs in a securities class action lawsuit against a drug maker and certain of its executive officers asked a federal judge in California on March 15 to certify a class of investors, arguing that class certification is statutorily appropriate (Hsingching Hsu v. Puma Biotechnology Inc., et al., No. 15-0865, C.D. Calif.).