Brotherston v. Putnam Investments

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Brotherston v. Putnam Investments. Read the opinion of the Court — 907 F.3d 17 →

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit·Decided October 25, 2018·No. 17-1711E·Errata

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit

No. 17-1711

JOHN BROTHERSTON, individually and as representative of a class of similarly situated persons, and on behalf of the Putnam Retirement Plan; JOAN GLANCY, individually and as representative of a class of similarly situated persons, and on behalf of the Putnam Retirement Plan,

Plaintiffs, Appellants,

PUTNAM INVESTMENTS, LLC; PUTNAM BENEFITS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE; PUTNAM BENEFITS INVESTMENT COMMITTEE; ROBERT REYNOLDS; PUTNAM INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT LLC; PUTNAM INVESTOR SERVICES, INC.,

Defendants, Appellees.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this court issued on October 15, 2018, is amended as follows:

On page 43, line 10, replace "foregone" with "forgone."

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit

No. 17-1711

Plaintiffs, Appellants,

PUTNAM INVESTMENTS, LLC; PUTNAM BENEFITS OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE; PUTNAM BENEFITS INVESTMENT COMMITTEE; ROBERT REYNOLDS; PUTNAM INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT LLC; PUTNAM INVESTOR SERVICES, INC.,

Defendants, Appellees.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this court issued on October 15, 2018, is amended as follows:

On page 43, line 10, replace "foregone" with "forgone."

Brotherston v. Putnam Investments, (1st Cir. 2018).

Pincite

Brotherston v. Putnam Investments (Brotherston v. Putnam Investments) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.