Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 145
Jones et al v. Memorial Hermann Health System et al
as 4:2024cv02105
Plaintiff: Desri Jones, Janet Fleming, Sanda Moody and others
Defendant: Memorial Hermann Health System, The Board of Directors of the Memorial Hermann Health System, The Memorial Hermann Health System Investment Committee and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1145 E.R.I.S.A.
Enstrom et al v. SAS Institute Inc. et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 5:2024cv00105
Plaintiff: Betsy Enstrom, John Stana, Kevin Arias-Watkins and others
Defendant: SAS Institute Inc., The Board of Directors of SAS Institute, Inc., The Retirement Committee of SAS Institute Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Collins et al v. Northeast Grocery, Inc. et al
as 5:2024cv00080
Plaintiff: Gail Collins, Dean Devito, Michael Lamoureux and others
Defendant: Northeast Grocery, Inc., The Administrative Committee of the Northeast Grocery, Inc. 401(k) Savings Plan and John and Jane Does 1-30
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1104 Recovery of Benefits to Employee
Middleton v. Amentum Government Services Parent Holdings, LLC et al
as 2:2023cv02456
Plaintiff: Jay Middleton
Defendant: Amentum Government Services Parent Holdings, LLC, Amentum Benefits Administration Committee, Tammy Woodman and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
Tanika Parker, et al v. Tenneco, Inc., et al
as 23-1857
Plaintiff / Appellee: TANIKA PARKER, individually and on behalf of the DRIV 401(K) RETIREMENT SAVINGS PLAN, and all others similarly situated and ANDREW FARRIER, individually and on behalf of the DRIV 401(K) RETIREMENT SAVINGS PLAN, and all others similarly situated
Defendant / Appellant: TENNECO, INC., DRIV AUTOMOTIVE, INC., TENNECO AUTOMOTIVE OPERATING COMPANY, INC. and others
Defendant: DOES, 1-30, John and Jane Doe Defendants
Baird et al v. Steel Dynamics Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv00356
Plaintiff: Matthew Baird, Michael Sanderson and Brandon Thompson
Defendant: Steel Dynamics Inc., The Board of Directors of Steel Dynamics Inc., The Steel Dynamics Inc. Investment Committee and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1109 Breach of Fiduciary Duties
Singh v. Deloitte LLP
as 23-1108
Plaintiff / Appellant: Rupinder Singh, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Jeffrey S. Popkin, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Joni Walker, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and others
Defendant / Appellee: Deloitte LLP, The Board of Directors of Deloitte LLP, The Retirement Plan Committee of Deloitte LLP and others
Colston et al v. Ameritas Holding Company et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 4:2023cv03137
Plaintiff: Amber Colston, Willis Bramwell and Roseann Blessing
Defendant: Ameritas Holding Company, The Board of Directors of Ameritas Holding Company, The Ameritas 401(k) Retirement Plan Committee and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1109 Breach of Fiduciary Duties
Erica Barrett, et al v. O'Reilly Automotive, Inc., et al
as 23-2501
Plaintiff / Appellant: Erica Barrett, Kathleen Vincent, Connie Enderle and others
Defendant / Appellee: O'Reilly Automotive, Inc., The Board of Directors of O'Reilly Automotive, Inc., O'Reilly Automotive 401(k) Plan Investment Committee and others
Perkins v. United Surgical Partners We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 23-10375
Plaintiff / Appellant: Amanda Perkins, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Heather C. Holst, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Terry J. Williams, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and others
Defendant / Appellee: United Surgical Partners International, Inc., Retirement Plan Administration Committee of United Surgical Partners International, Inc. and John Does 1-30

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?