Riley v. Barringer

In a company’s ERISA suit against a former employee and retirement fiduciary accused of embezzling from the plaintiff company, the court denied the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss the employee’s counterclaim for breach of implied contract and unjust enrichment.

The employee allegedly transferred her own funds to the company at the president’s request, which was a valuable service that conferred a benefit. The company accepted the funds and didn’t repay her. In light of their employment relationship, rather than a friendly or familial relationship, and the size of the sum of money, the facts alleged are sufficient to infer that the company was on notice that she expected to be repaid.

The court dismissed several other counterclaims.

Riley v. Barringer, No. 1:18cv7, Oct. 9, 2018. WDVA at Abingdon (Jones).

Categories: Opinions, U.S. District Court - Western District of Virginia

Tags: ,

%d bloggers like this: