Beck

MEMORANDUM *

In an opinion published today, we hold that the bankruptcy court did not err in concluding that the Crown board breached its fiduciary duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461 , affirm the district court’s ruling on this issue, and remand the issue of PACE’s standing. Crown challenges the remedy imposed by the bankruptcy court. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158 (d), and we affirm.

Bankruptcy courts have broad authority to order appropriate equitable relief. See, e.g., Johnson v. Home State Bank, 501 U.S. 78, 88 , 111 S.Ct. 2150 , 115 L.Ed.2d 66 (1991) (“[T]he bankruptcy court retains its broad equitable power to issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of [the Code].”) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted, second alteration in original). Moreover, ERISA § 502(a)(3) specifically recognizes that plan participants, beneficiaries or fiduciaries may obtain injunctive or “other appropriate equitable relief’ to redress ERISA violations or to enforce ERISA provisions. 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (a)(3). ERISA § 409 contains a “catchall”…