District Court Denies Motion to Compel Arbitration Over Breach of Fiduciary Duties Claims

Despite the strong federal policy in favor of arbitration, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio recently denied a motion to compel arbitration concerning an alleged injury to a defined contribution retirement plan and its participants. In this case, two plaintiffs brought an action pursuant to § 409 and § 502(a)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) individually and on behalf of other similarly situated plan participants against Cintas Corporation for breaching its fiduciary duties of loyalty and prudence by mismanaging and failing to investigate and select better cost options for the plan. In response to this lawsuit, Cintas filed a motion to compel arbitration based on the employment agreements signed by the two plaintiffs.

Read the complete story here.

Featured Arbitrators

ad
View all
ad

Read these next

Category

Arbitration Conversation No. 43: Prof. Andrea Bjorklund of McGill University Faculty of Law

In this episode of the Arbitration Conversation Amy interviews Prof. Andrea Bjorklund, Full Professor and the L. Yves Fortier Chair in International Arbitration and International Commercial Law at McGill University...

By Andrea Bjorklund, Amy Schmitz
Category

Arbitration Conversation No. 55: Jan Martinez, Director, Gould ADR Program, Stanford Law School

In this episode of the Arbitration Conversation, Amy interviews Janet Martinez, Director, Gould Negotiation and Mediation Program; Director, Gould Alternative Dispute Resolution Research Initiative at Stanford Law School about dispute...

By Janet Martinez, Amy Schmitz
Category

This Just In: SCOTUS Decides Badgerow

 Just as we went to press came word that, based on statutory construction, the Supreme Court has decided Badgerow v. Walters, No. 20-1143, ruling 8-1 that the “look through” doctrine does...

By George Friedman

Find an Arbitrator

X
X
X