Class Suit Filed Over DuPont Pension Funds
“These companies are now attempting to find ways to not only avoid funding the plan, but also are placing it in jeopardy of failing, leaving the workers with little or no pension after a lifetime of savings,” said W. Daniel “Dee” Miles, III of Beasley Allen.
July 12, 2019 at 04:04 PM
4 minute read
A lawsuit on behalf of former DuPont employees saying their retirement benefits are in jeopardy because of the company's merger with Dow Chemical has been filed in federal court.
The putative class action, Thondukolam v. Corteva Inc., was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on July 3, on behalf of more than 100,000 people, including retirees and beneficiaries in the pension plan.
Lawyers from Beasley Allen of Atlanta—W. Daniel “Dee” Miles, III, head of the firm's consumer fraud section, and James Eubank—are working with a legal team that includes: Elizabeth Hopkins of Kantor & Kantor in Northridge, California; Thomas Sinclair and Rebecca Gilliland of Sinclair Law Firm in Birmingham, Alabama; and Edward Stone of Edward Stone Law in Greenwich, Connecticut.
“Workers for DuPont have given decades of their working lives to the company to secure a pension for retirement that they were promised. These companies are now attempting to find ways to not only avoid funding the plan, but also are placing it in jeopardy of failing, leaving the workers with little or no pension after a lifetime of savings,” Miles said in a news release.
The company did not have an immediate response.
“Nearly two years ago, The Dow Chemical Company merged with the 217-year-old E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, one of the oldest companies in the United States. The combined entity, DowDuPont, was the largest chemical conglomerate in the world. The two historical companies had intended and planned from the beginning to separate into three wholly independent companies and move the Plan to one of the newly formed companies,” the complaint said.
“Barely a year later more details on the plan were finally released when, on November 1, 2018, Ed Breen, CEO of DowDuPont, announced that the Plan, along with Historical DuPont, were moving to a company with the trade name Corteva Agriscience … a spin-off purely focused on agriculture. The existence of Historical DuPont, the Plan's sponsor for more than a century and the company for whom the plan participants worked, would be mostly nominal, as all of the assets and business lines of that company other than its agricultural businesses would stay with the New DuPont or the New Dow, while all of its pension liabilities, along with tremendous litigation liabilities, would transfer,” the complaint added.
The liability of the DuPont U.S. Pension plan is approximately $19 billion, according to the complaint. The retirees alleged that Corteva, which solely focuses on agriscience business, understates its liabilities, including income fluctuations due to weather, global trade and other factors beyond the company's control.
Also, the retirees said, the agriscience business involves the manufacture of chemicals already subject to large-scale litigation, the liability for which was also transferred to Corteva. The retirees contend that, under Corteva, the pension plan is underfunded and uses overly optimistic estimates. Now that Corteva, Dow, and DuPont are three separate companies, Corteva can file for bankruptcy and discharge its responsibility to fund the promised pensions, leaving retirees to receive pennies on the dollar, and neither DuPont nor Dow would be affected by such a bankruptcy, the plaintiffs claim.
Miles estimated the pension plan could be underfunded by $5 billion.
“While all of this happened, DuPont assured pensioners that their retirement was well funded and safe,” Miles said. He said the plan was, “already in a downward funding spiral” and is “now left with an empty shell company as a plan sponsor, linked to a newly formed company that is also saddled with all of the environmental and agricultural liabilities of the historical Dow/DuPont companies.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHershey's 'Bubble Yum' Hit With Consumer Class Action for Allegedly Containing 'Forever Chemicals'
Los Angeles Secures $35M Settlement From Monsanto in Water Contamination Lawsuit
Bonta, Environmental Groups Sue Exxon Mobil Over Plastic Recycling Claims
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1The Key Moves in the Reshuffling German Legal Market as 2025 Dawns
- 2Social Media Celebrities Clash in $100M Lawsuit
- 3Federal Judge Sets 2026 Admiralty Bench Trial in Baltimore Bridge Collapse Litigation
- 4Trump Media Accuses Purchaser Rep of Extortion, Harassment After Merger
- 5Judge Slashes $2M in Punitive Damages in Sober-Living Harassment Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250