United States: Does Jander Signal The Liberalization Of Pleading Standards In Stock-Drop Cases? Signs Point To No

Last Updated: July 31 2019
Article by Darren E. Nadel and David Gartenberg

The Second Circuit sent shock waves through the community of ERISA stock-drop practitioners late last year in Jander v. Retirement Plans Committee of IBM1 by finding plan participants had plausibly alleged a breach of duty of prudence claim against plan fiduciaries.2 Jander is the only appellate court decision to have found such a claim plausibly pled since the Supreme Court's decisions in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer3 and Amgen Inc. v. Harris4 significantly raised the pleading bar for plaintiffs. It thus raised the prospect that the Second Circuit was signaling the liberalization of pleading standards in stock-drop cases (at least in the Second Circuit), despite the long line of cases finding stock-drop plaintiffs had failed to meet their pleading burden under Dudenhoeffer.

However, the Supreme Court recently granted certiorari on Jander, so litigants may soon have more clarity on whether the Second Circuit itself properly applied the Dudenhoeffer standard.

Recapping Dudenhoeffer, Amgen & Jander

"Stock-drop" lawsuits involve 401(k) plans, employee stock ownership plans ("ESOPs"), or similar plans that include employer stock as an investment option. In the event of a stock price drop, plan participants may allege the plan fiduciaries breached their duty of prudence under ERISA by failing to remove the stock from the plan or to take other corrective action, such as disclosing corrective information about problems with the company. These often are companion cases to securities litigation.

In Dudenhoeffer, the Supreme Court held that when a breach of duty of prudence claim is based on inside information—i.e., information known to the fiduciaries but not to the public—"a plaintiff must plausibly allege an alternative action that the defendant could have taken that would have been consistent with the securities laws and that a prudent fiduciary in the same circumstances would not have viewed as more likely to harm the fund than to help it."5 This holding derives from the notion that an ERISA fiduciary's responsibility is to the plan participants—not the public—and it is thus reasonable for a fiduciary to decide not to act, unless no reasonable fiduciary could conclude that acting would do more harm to the participants than good. For example, unless plan participants make plausible, non-conclusory allegations in a complaint that a proposed alternative action—such as proactively disclosing problems with the company not previously known to the public—would not have harmed a stock's value more than helped it, a complaint fails to state a claim for breach of the duty of prudence.6

Amgen amplified this principle, holding that a complaint must include sufficient facts and allegations supporting the proposition of a breach of fiduciary duty to survive a motion to dismiss.7 It was not enough to plead the conclusion that an alternative action could plausibly have satisfied Dudenhoeffer's standards.8 Rather, the "facts and allegations supporting that proposition should appear in the stockholders' complaint."9

The pleading standard set by Dudenhoeffer and Amgen has been variously described as "strenuous,"10 "very tough," "highly exacting," and "incredibly difficult to satisfy."11 Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of ERISA duty of prudence claims brought since Dudenhoeffer have foundered on the pleading requirement.12

But not all of them.

In Jander, the Second Circuit revived a stock-drop case, finding that the plaintiffs had plausibly alleged a claim for breach of the duty of prudence. The Jander plaintiffs alleged that the plan fiduciaries knew the company's market price was artificially inflated due to undisclosed problems with a subsidiary, which was eventually sold. Plaintiffs alleged that when the plan fiduciaries learned the stock price was artificially inflated, they should have either made corrective disclosures to plan participants about the subsidiary's "true value," or frozen investments in the company's stock. The complaint also alleged that disclosure of the issues with the poorly performing subsidiary was inevitable, because the company intended to sell the subsidiary, at which time the poor performance would have to be publicly disclosed.

In finding that the Jander plaintiffs had plausibly alleged a breach of the duty of prudence, the Second Circuit found allegations of "inevitable disclosure" to be "particularly important," reasoning that "when a drop in the value of the stock already held by the fund is inevitable, it is far more plausible" that failure to disclose would do more harm than good, and that no prudent fiduciary would fail to promptly disclose.13

Thus, if it is upheld, Jander would establish an "inevitable disclosure" road map by which plaintiffs could allege a duty of prudence claim.

The Second Circuit Affirms Dismissal of a Stock-Drop Case in O'Day v. Chatila

While the Second Circuit found the allegations in Jander to be plausibly pled, it recently had the opportunity to evaluate the sufficiency of stock-drop allegations in a case that did not involve inevitable disclosure, in O'Day v. Chatila, No. 18-2621-CV, 2019 WL 2404660 (2d Cir. June 7, 2019), and again found them to be deficient.

The plaintiffs in O'Day alleged that the plan defendants had breached their duty of prudence by continuing to offer company shares as an investment option despite their access to public and non-public information regarding the company's dire financial straits. In a short summary order, the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the O'Day plaintiffs' claims, holding that they had not plausibly alleged their claims.14

In so doing, the court expressly distinguished Jander on two grounds: (1) in Jander, "it was inevitable that the overvaluation would be disclosed"; and (2) the Jander plaintiffs had identified studies showing that "early disclosure of fraud would soften the reputational damage" of a later disclosure.15 In contrast, O'Day presented no similar or analogous allegations. The Second Circuit then tied O'Day back to an earlier Second Circuit decision affirming dismissal of stock-drop claims that did not involve allegations of inevitable disclosure, Rinehart v. Lehman Bros. Holdings,16 finding O'Day to be much more analogous to Rinehart than the alleged facts of Jander.17

Thus, in its first opportunity to evaluate the sufficiency of duty of prudence claims after Jander, the court found a complaint for which there was no "inevitable disclosure" to be deficient.

The Supreme Court Takes Up Jander

On June 3, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Jander, representing the Supreme Court's first opportunity to opine on the pleading sufficiency of a duty of prudence claim under ERISA since Amgen. Thus, the Supreme Court will decide the important question of whether "inevitable disclosure" is a sufficient allegation to overcome the high pleading bar set by Duddenhoffer and Amgen.

In addition to taking comfort in the fact that the Second Circuit indicated in O'Day that Jander is to be narrowly construed, stock-drop practitioners should soon also know18 whether plaintiffs in stock-drop cases may survive motions to dismiss where they plausibly plead inevitable disclosure.


1 Jander v. Ret. Plans Comm. of IBM, 910 F.3d 620 (2d Cir. 2018), cert. granted, No. 18-1165, 2019 WL 1100213 (U.S. June 3, 2019).

2 910 F. 3d 620 (2d Cir. 2018).

3 134 S. Ct. 2459 (2014).

4 136 S. Ct. 758 (2016).

5 Dudenhoeffer, 134 S. Ct. at 2472.

6 See also Whitley v. BP, P.L.C., 838 F.3d 523, 529 (5th Cir. 2016) ("the plaintiff bears the significant burden of proposing an alternative course of action so clearly beneficial that a prudent fiduciary could not conclude that it would be more likely to harm the fund than to help it." ) (emphasis in original).

7 Amgen Inc., 136 S. Ct. at 760.

8 Id.

9 Id. at 760.

10 In re SunEdison, Inc. ERISA Litig., No. 16-md-2742 (PKC), 16-mc-2744 (PKC), 2018 WL 3733946, at *6-*8 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 6, 2018).

11 Dormani v. Target Corp., No. 17-CV-4049 (JNE/SER), 2018 WL 3014126, at *4 (D. Minn. June 15, 2018) (collecting authorities).

12 Price v. Strianese, No. 17 Civ. 652 (VEC), 2017 WL 4466614, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 4. 2017).

13 Jander, 910 F.3d at 630.

14 See O'Day v. Chatila, No. 18-2621-CV, 2019 WL 2404660 (2d Cir. June 7, 2019).

15 Id. at *1.

16 817 F.3d 56, 68 (2d Cir. 2016).

17 Id. ("This case is therefore quite different from Jander and much closer to Rinehart, in which we addressed allegations that a prudent fiduciary should have divested or stopped purchasing stock and held that a prudent fiduciary could have concluded that such an action would have done more harm than good.")

18 Jander is expected to be heard by the Court in its 2019-2020 term.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions