Leach v. Textron, Inc et al
Filing
56
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part (33) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:09-cv-00383-PJB -LDA; granting in part and denying in part (30) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:09-cv-00412-PJB -LDA; granting in part and denying in part (30) Mot ion to Dismiss in case 1:09-cv-00421-PJB -LDA; granting in part and denying in part (36) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:09-cv-00424-PJB -LDA; granting in part and denying in part (19) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:09-cv-00440-PJB -LDA; granting in part an d denying in part (16) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:09-cv-00504-PJB -LDA; granting in part and denying in part (12) Motion to Dismiss in case 1:09-cv-00542-PJB -LDA -- MOTION TO DISMISS GRANTED TO THE EXTENT THAT PLAINTIFFS BASE THEIR BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY CLAIM ON ALLEGED MISSTATEMENTS BY THE DEFENDANTS. IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS, MOTION DENIED. So Ordered by Judge Paul J. Barbadoro (New Hampshire) on 9/6/2011. Associated Cases: 1:09-cv-00383-PJB -LDA et al.(Duhamel, John)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
In re Textron, Inc. ERISA
Litigation
Case No.
09-cv-00383-PJB
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
The named plaintiffs in this class action are participants
in a retirement plan sponsored by Textron, Inc.
(the "Plan")
that included as one of its investment options the Textron Stock
Fund (the "Fund").
Plaintiffs invoke the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA")
in asserting breach of
fiduciary duty claims against Textron, the committee that
oversaw administration of the Plan, and several individuals who
were members of the committee during the class period.
They
claim that the defendants are liable because they made
misleading statements about Textron's financial condition,
failed to disclose material adverse information about the
company, and allowed class members to make what the defendants
knew or should have known were imprudent investments in the
Fund.
Defendants have filed a motion to dismiss contending that
the complaint fails to state a claim for relief.
They argue
that plaintiffs cannot base a claim on the defendants' allegedly
misleading statements because the defendants were not acting as
ERISA fiduciaries when they made the statements.
They contend
that they cannot be held liable for failing to disclose
information because they did not have a duty to disclose the
omitted information.
Finally, they assert that plaintiffs'
imprudent investment claim is a nonstarter because the complaint
does not sufficiently allege that the Fund was an imprudent
investment.
I .
BACKGROUND
Textron is a conglomerate that manufactures and sells
helicopters, light transportation vehicles, and lawn care
machinery.
It is also a major parts supplier to the automotive
industry and it has a large commercial finance business.
Textron operates through five business segments, three of which
are involved in this case:
Cessna Aircraft Company ("Cessna"),
a manufacturer of general aviation aircraft, Bell Helicopter
Textron Inc.
("Bell Helicopter"), a manufacturer of military and
general use helicopters, and Textron Financial Corporation
("TFC"), a commercial finance company.
2
Consolidated Class
Action Compl.
("Compl.")
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?