Skip to main content

DuPont/Corteva Early Retirement Case

Case Overview

This class-action ERISA lawsuit challenges the elimination or reduction of early retirement benefits around which many employees of the Dupont company planned their careers following the spin-off by Dupont of a former subsidiary, Corteva Agriscience. The suit was filed in 2021 by two such employees, Robert F. Cockerill and Christopher W. Newton, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, and was later joined by Oliver Major and Darrell Benson.

Retirement benefits attorneys at Kantor & Kantor, with co-counsel Edward Stone Law, P.C. and Feinberg Jackson, filed suit on behalf of Mr. Cockerill, Mr. Newton, Mr. Major and Mr. Benson and a class of similarly situated employees, asserting claims for early and optional retirement benefits as well as claims for fiduciary breach and other violations of ERISA and, alternatively, for violation of state law, based on the Defendants’ self-serving and erroneous interpretation of plan terms and their broken promises.

Case Name

The case name is Cockerill v. Corteva, Inc., No. 21-3966, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania

Status of the Litigation

On December 18, 2024, the Court issued findings of facts and conclusions of law. Click here to review the Court’s ruling on liability. The Court ruled finding in favor of the Plaintiffs with respect to both the Early and Optional Retirement Classes.

On November 17, 2023, the Court granted class certification for two classes, an Early Retirement Class and an Optional Retirement Class. Class notices are being mailed and emailed beginning Friday, June 10, 2024. Click here for more information. If you believe you are a member of either class and have not received a notice, please contact us.

On August 4, 2022, the district court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss, holding that plaintiffs are entitled to discovery on their claims. In July 2023, the Plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint, and the Defendants moved to dismiss the second amended complaint. The Court denied the Defendants’ motion on September 1, 2023.

The Court has set a trial beginning June 17, 2024.

This case will be updated to reflect important developments in the case.

If you would like to speak to an attorney about the status of the case, please complete and submit the form below and someone will contact you.

Please complete the following fields to the best of your ability. Please note, this form is not to register as a class member. This is for inquiries only.

Your personal data will only be used to determine if you are a member of a class in this case and, if you are, to provide you notice about your rights and any recovery you may be entitled to. Your personal information will not be used for any other purpose.

    First Name (required)
    Last Name (required)
    Employee ID number
    Address
    Email (required)
    Phone
    Employer prior to June 1, 2019 (required)
    Work Location
    Union
    Date of Birth
    Age on May 31, 2019 (required)
    Years of service in the pension plan at May 31, 2019?
    Have you received a Notice of Class Action?
    Have you started receiving pension benefits?
    If yes, date you started your pension:
    Are you receiving less than 100% of your pension?
    Additional Comments

    Recent Trial Verdicts

    Recent Trial Verdicts

    Kantor & Kantor obtained successful outcomes for our clients who had the following disabling conditions:

    Fibromyalgia and Mast Cell Activation Syndrome

    Hartford had denied the claim, stating that our client’s cognitive deficits were manufactured and that she could perform her own occupation, which required engineer-type skills. Among other things, Hartford relied upon a doctor who did not believe in the disabling potential of Fibromyalgia. In its decision for our client, the Court stated that Hartford’s medical evidence was not credible because its physician did not accept Fibromyalgia as a potentially disabling condition.

    MORE
    Photo: Fibromyalgia

    Orthopedic Back Injury/Arthritis

    Our client suffered from a degenerative back condition, which made it difficult for her to sit for long periods of time. Cigna denied the claim, forcing our client to litigate to obtain the benefits to which she deserved. The Court found in favor of our client, holding that Cigna’s physicians engaged in a selective review of the medical records. An insurance carrier is required to consider all of the evidence; not just that which favors its financial interests.

    MORE
    Photo: Arthritis

    Seizure Disorder

    Hartford improperly terminated our client’s benefits, after he had been on claim for almost 20 years, while still suffering from breakthrough convulsions. The Court held that the isolated evidence that Hartford relied upon to support its claim termination was insufficient to support its contrary conclusion.

    MORE
    Photo: Seizures