In re Omnicom Group. Inc. ERISA Litigation
- Colleen McMahon
- 1:20-cv-04141
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In re Omnicom Group Inc. ERISA Litigation: Magistrate Judge Cave granted defendants’ motion to compel limited information about plaintiffs’ outside investments.
The plaintiffs in the Omnicom Group ERISA litigation, including Surfina Adams, and the defendants seeking information about the plaintiffs’ investments outside the Omnicom plan.
What happened
In In re Omnicom Group Inc. ERISA Litigation, the defendants asked the court to require the plaintiffs to produce documents about investments they made outside the Omnicom Group Retirement Savings Plan. A motion for class certification was pending, and the plaintiffs’ allegations placed their financial sophistication and outside investments at issue.
The court granted the defendants’ motion to the extent that each plaintiff must provide information about outside investments during the same period that plaintiff invested in the Omnicom plan. Plaintiff Surfina Adams also must provide information about her outside investments immediately after she left the plan.
Sarah L. Cave, the United States Magistrate Judge, issued the order on April 20, 2022.
The detailed version
- In re Omnicom Group. Inc. ERISA Litigation · No. 1:20-cv-04141
- Colleen McMahon
- Apr. 20, 2022
Background
The defendants filed a letter-motion asking the court to compel the plaintiffs to produce documents concerning investments outside the Omnicom Group Retirement Savings Plan. The court referred to these as the “Non-Plan Investments.” The request arose while a motion for class certification was pending. The court also noted that the plaintiffs’ allegations placed their sophistication and contemporaneous Non-Plan Investments at issue.
Ruling
The court found that the circumstances were analogous to two prior decisions cited in the order. It granted the defendants’ motion to the extent that the plaintiffs must produce:
- Information about each plaintiff’s Non-Plan Investments during the same period that plaintiff invested in the Omnicom plan; and - Information about Plaintiff Surfina Adams’ Non-Plan Investments immediately after her departure from the Omnicom plan.
The order does not state that the motion was granted beyond these specified categories of information.
Judge and Effect
Sarah L. Cave, United States Magistrate Judge, issued the order following a discovery conference held on April 20, 2022. The ruling requires the plaintiffs to provide the specified investment information to the defendants in the litigation.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.