Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer
2014 United States Supreme Court case / From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dear Wikiwand AI, let's keep it short by simply answering these key questions:
Can you list the top facts and stats about Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer?
Summarize this article for a 10 year old
SHOW ALL QUESTIONS
Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer, 573 U.S. 409 (2014), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court found Employee stockownership (ESOP) fiduciaries have the same prudential duties as non-ESOP fiduciaries, as set by ERISA, except that they are not required to diversify their investments beyond shares of the employer's stock.[1][2]
Quick Facts Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer, Argued 2 April, 2014 Decided 25 June, 2014 ...
Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer | |
---|---|
Argued 2 April, 2014 Decided 25 June, 2014 | |
Full case name | Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer |
Docket no. | 12-751 |
Citations | 573 U.S. 409 (more) 134 S. Ct. 2459; 189 L. Ed. 2d 457 |
Holding | |
There is no statutory basis for a 'presumption of prudence' test under ERISA. ESOP fiduciaries share the same duty of care as non-ESOP fiduciaries. | |
Court membership | |
| |
Case opinion | |
Majority | Breyer, joined by unanimous |
Laws applied | |
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 |
Close