Opinion ID: 693407
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Maxxam, MGI and Other Individuals' Fiduciary Status

Text: 70 PLC also contends that the district court erred in failing to find that as a matter of law, MAXXAM, MGI, Schwartz and Iaco were not fiduciaries. 9 PLC claims that there has been no showing of direct fiduciary responsibility. This claim lacks merit. Viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, the district court did not err in finding that a genuine issue of fact exists. While PLC is correct that fiduciary status rests on an objective evaluation of functions performed, and not on an individual's state of mind, such an objective evaluation will be based on questions of fact regarding discretionary duty and control that must be determined at trial.