White v. Marshall & Ilsley Corp.

Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
Citation
Case Number: 
No. 11-2660
Decision Date: 
April 19, 2013
Federal District: 
E.D. Wisc.
Holding: 
Affirmed
Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-employer investment plan’s motion to dismiss for failure to state cause of action in ERISA action by plaintiffs-employee investors asserting that defendant violated its duty of prudence under section 1104 by continuing to offer employer’s stock fund as one of several options in said plan, despite stock’s poor performance that eventually resulted in 54 percent drop in stock price. Defendant merely complied with terms of plan that required that employer’s stock fund be offered in plan “regardless of fortune” and under all circumstances “no matter how dire.” Mofreover, record showed that instant decline in stock price was not extraordinary so as to overcome any presumption of prudence, where decline was consistent with what rest of stock market experienced. Also, offering employer’s stock fund did not expose plaintiffs to excessive risk, where plan gave plaintiffs other investment options.