No. 18-1271
Charles E. White, Jr., et al. v. Chevron Corporation, et al.
Response Waived
Tags: breach-of-fiduciary-duty circuit-split decision-making-process eighth-circuit employee-retirement-income-security-act-erisa erisa-fiduciary-duties erisa-fiduciary-duty fiduciary-breach ninth-circuit participant-claims pleading-standards secretary-of-labor twombly-iqbal
Latest Conference:
2019-05-23
Question Presented (from Petition)
In pleading a breach of fiduciary duty under ERISA, is it sufficient for a plaintiff to allege a deficient decision-making process indirectly through inferences from the facts known to her?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Sufficiency of pleading breach of ERISA fiduciary duties
Docket Entries
2019-05-28
Petition DENIED.
2019-05-09
Supplemental brief of petitioners Charles E. White, Jr., et al. filed. (Distributed)
2019-05-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/23/2019.
2019-05-03
Waiver of right of respondents Chevron Corporation, et al. to respond filed.
2019-04-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 3, 2019)
Attorneys
Charles E. White, Jr., et al.
Michael Armin Wolff — Schlichter Bogard & Denton LLP, Petitioner
Chevron Corporation, et al.
Jonathan D. Hacker — O'Melveny & Myers LLP, Respondent