Baker

Baker v. Save Mart Supermarkets

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaApril 7, 20231:22-cv-04645California5,822 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 KATHERINE BAKER, et al., Case No. 22-cv-04645-WHO

Plaintiffs,

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

v. DISMISS

SAVE MART SUPERMARKETS, Re: Dkt. No. 25 Defendant.

12 Defendant Save Mart Supermarkets (“Save Mart”) moves to dismiss a class action complaint filed by Katherine Baker, Jose Luna, Edgar Popke, and Denny Wraske (collectively, “the plaintiffs”), former employees of the grocery store chain who allege that Save Mart breached its fiduciary duty under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) by misrepresenting the medical benefits provided to non-union retirees. The plaintiffs have plausibly alleged the remediable wrong that Save Mart breached its fiduciary duty of loyalty when it made two misrepresentations: (1) that the plaintiffs’ non-union benefits would be as good or better than those of their union counterparts, and (2) that if the plaintiffs retired by December 31, 2017, they would retain a certain benefit for the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.