Morton Buildings, Inc. Leveraged ESOP Case
Summary
Bailey Glasser represents a participant in the Morton Buildings, Inc. Leveraged Employee Stock Ownership Plan (the “ESOP”) in a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, Peoria Division. The case is called Jackie Lysengen v. Argent Trust Company, Edward C. Miller, Getz Family Limited Partnership, Estate of Henry A. Getz, and Estate of Virginia Miller (Case Number 1:20-cv-01177), and it is before United States District Judge Michael M. Mihm. Members of the ERISA litigation team at Bailey Glasser (Gregory Y. Porter, Ryan T. Jenny, Patrick O. Muench, and Laura Babiak) represent the plaintiff.
The plaintiff in Lysengen v. Argent seeks relief for any and all losses to the ESOP and its participants caused by violations of the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) in connection with the ESOP’s purchase of Morton Buildings stock in May 2017 for $147,786,877. The lawsuit alleges the ESOP paid too much for the stock and the ESOP’s trustee, Argent Trust Company, is liable for breaching its fiduciary duties and causing prohibited transactions under the statute. The lawsuit also seeks reimbursement to the ESOP of overpayments made to the selling shareholders named as defendants.
The lawsuit survived the defendants’ motions to dismiss the case in 2020 and 2022. Discovery has been completed. Summary judgment motions are due on March 17, 2023, in which the defendants are again expected to seek dismissal of all or part of the lawsuit, and the plaintiff will seek judgment on certain claims and defenses prior to trial. The court has declined to certify the case as a class action. The plaintiff is seeking plan-wide relief for all the participants’ and ESOP’s losses in the May 2017 transaction on behalf of the ESOP under 29 U.S.C. §§ 1109(a), 1132(a)(2).
Some of the key court filings that may be of interest to other participants and beneficiaries in the Morton ESOP may be found via the links below.
Dkt. 22 Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss & exhibits
Dkt. 31 Order & Opinion denying motion to dismiss
Dkt. 32 Plaintiff’s Surreply in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
Dkt. 57 First Amended Complaint
Dkt. 58 Answer of Argent Trust Co. to Amended Complaint
Dkt. 59 Jan Rouse & Edward C. Miller’s Answer to Amended Complaint
Dkt. 124 Order & Opinion denying motions to dismiss of Estates & Getz FLP
Dkt. 126 Answer of Getz Family Limited Partnership to Amended Complaint
Dkt. 127 Answer of Estate of Virginia Miller to Amended Complaint
Dkt. 128 Answer of Estate of Henry A. Getz to Amended Complaint
Dkt. 165 Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
Dkt. 166 Plaintiff's Brief ISO Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
Dkt. 201 Plaintiff's Summary Judgment Reply to Argent's Opposition
Dkt. 202 Plaintiff's Summary Judgment Reply to Miller and Estates' Opposition
Dkt. 203 Plaintiff's Summary Judgment Reply to Getz FLP's Opposition
Dkt. 225 Summary Judgment Order and Opinion on Proceeding in Representative Capacity
