This HTML5 document contains 69 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
dctermshttp://purl.org/dc/terms/
n19https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4182322/145/sulyma-v-intel-corporation-investment-policy-committee/
dbohttp://dbpedia.org/ontology/
foafhttp://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/
n13https://apps.oyez.org/player/%23/roberts10/oral_argument_audio/
n8https://global.dbpedia.org/id/
n18https://www.oyez.org/cases/2019/
n16https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/
dbthttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Template:
rdfshttp://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#
n17https://www.leagle.com/decision/
n4https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/589/18-1116/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
owlhttp://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
wikipedia-enhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
dbchttp://dbpedia.org/resource/Category:
dbphttp://dbpedia.org/property/
provhttp://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
wikidatahttp://www.wikidata.org/entity/
dbrhttp://dbpedia.org/resource/

Statements

Subject Item
dbr:Intel_Corp._Investment_Policy_Committee_v._Sulyma
rdf:type
dbo:SupremeCourtOfTheUnitedStatesCase wikidata:Q2334719 dbo:LegalCase dbo:UnitOfWork owl:Thing dbo:Case
rdfs:label
Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma
rdfs:comment
Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma, 589 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case. It decided that, for purposes of the requirement in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 that plaintiffs with “actual knowledge” of an alleged fiduciary breach file suit within three years of gaining that knowledge, a plaintiff does not necessarily have “actual knowledge” of the information contained in disclosures that he receives but does not read or cannot recall reading. This affirmed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
foaf:name
Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee, et al., Petitioners v. Christopher M. Sulyma, Respondent
dcterms:subject
dbc:2020_in_United_States_case_law dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbc:Employee_Retirement_Income_Security_Act_of_1974
dbo:wikiPageID
64489737
dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
1075444257
dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
dbc:Employee_Retirement_Income_Security_Act_of_1974 dbr:9th_Cir. dbr:Department_of_Labor dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases dbr:Certiorari dbc:United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_of_the_Roberts_Court dbr:N.D._Cal. dbr:Employee_Retirement_Income_Security_Act_of_1974 dbr:United_States_Supreme_Court dbr:Summary_judgement dbr:United_States_District_Court_for_the_Northern_District_of_California dbr:F.3d dbr:L._Ed._2d dbr:United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Ninth_Circuit dbc:2020_in_United_States_case_law
dbo:wikiPageExternalLink
n4: n4:%23tab-opinion-4214198 n13:24944 n16:18-1116_h3cj.pdf n17:infco20181128145 n19: n18:18-1116
owl:sameAs
n8:CuTpR wikidata:Q97172681
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
dbt:Caselaw_source dbt:Reflist dbt:Infobox_SCOTUS_case dbt:Ussc
dbp:docket
18
dbp:joinmajority
unanimous
dbp:lawsapplied
dbr:Employee_Retirement_Income_Security_Act_of_1974
dbp:opinionannouncement
n4:%23tab-opinion-4214198
dbp:oralargument
n13:24944
dbp:oyez
n18:18-1116
dbp:parallelcitations
172800.0
dbp:prior
25920.0
dbp:uspage
___
dbp:usvol
589
dbp:arguedate
0001-12-04
dbp:argueyear
2019
dbp:decidedate
0001-02-26
dbp:decideyear
2020
dbp:fullname
Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee, et al., Petitioners v. Christopher M. Sulyma, Respondent
dbp:holding
Under the requirement in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 that plaintiffs with “actual knowledge” of an alleged fiduciary breach must file suit within three years of gaining that knowledge, a plaintiff does not necessarily have “actual knowledge” of the information contained in disclosures that he receives but does not read or cannot recall reading. Decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Affirmed.
dbp:justia
n4:
dbp:litigants
Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma
dbp:majority
Alito
dbp:otherSource
Supreme Court
dbp:otherUrl
n16:18-1116_h3cj.pdf
dbo:abstract
Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma, 589 U.S. ___ (2020), was a United States Supreme Court case. It decided that, for purposes of the requirement in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 that plaintiffs with “actual knowledge” of an alleged fiduciary breach file suit within three years of gaining that knowledge, a plaintiff does not necessarily have “actual knowledge” of the information contained in disclosures that he receives but does not read or cannot recall reading. This affirmed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
prov:wasDerivedFrom
wikipedia-en:Intel_Corp._Investment_Policy_Committee_v._Sulyma?oldid=1075444257&ns=0
dbo:wikiPageLength
5016
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
wikipedia-en:Intel_Corp._Investment_Policy_Committee_v._Sulyma