UnitedHealthcare sued by shareholders over reaction to CEO's killing
UnitedHealthcare sued by shareholders over reaction to CEO's killing
The group of investors alleged the company misled them by not adjusting its forecast after Brian Thompson was killed.
A group of investors sued UnitedHealthcare Group on Wednesday, accusing the company of misleading them after the killing of its CEO, Brian Thompson.
The class action lawsuit — filed in the Southern District of New York — accuses the health insurance company of not initially adjusting their 2025 net earning outlook to factor in how Thompson’s killing would affect their operations.
…
The group, which is seeking unspecified damages, argued that the public backlash prevented the company from pursuing “the aggressive, anti-consumer tactics that it would need to achieve” its earnings goals.
Everything about this is incredible.
I'm old. 53. I never gave too much thought to the whole capitalism vs communism vs socialism debate until my early 30's.
But at my age, it's become blatantly, obscenely obvious that unregulated, laissez-faire, free market capitalism is evil. That "fiducial duty" to prioritize stranger's money is more important than human lives.
Putting investors above common, basic decency is abominable, and irredeemable.
I don't give two fucks about shareholders, or their "investment."
I'm just a hair younger than you. I've never for a moment entertained communism. I've always been a believer in capitalism, but with the regulations and constraints we had in maybe the 70's (not going to imply there was a golden age of capitalism, but if there was it was before god damned Reagan). And if we can't regulate capitalism, I'm all for strangling it. Fuck everything about this dystopian bullshit. No one gives one single shit what happens beyond the next quarter. No one is in business to build things or solve problems—they are here to make fucking money.
Fuck. Unfettered. Capitalism.
It's as simple as this, my mom explained it to me at 8 years old: "A lot of parents give their kids money for good grades or doing chores, but that teaches them to do things for the money and not because it's the right thing to do."
It's a habit, like a drug addiction, your brain is rewarded by profit and molds itself around that, altering your view of right and wrong.
You arnt old. And I also feel the same as you. I am becoming anti consumer. I hope as a last chance Gen x get to go out in a blaze. I am becoming more activist. We have been fighters all our lives. Time to use it for good.
In a world gone Onion, that's easily the most Onion'ish true story I've seen. So far...
They're literally suing the company for not being evil enough.
That's so insane that merely taking part in that suit should be seen as grounds for a psych hold.
The fact that people can't tell whether it was a group of activist investors highlighting the unethical behaviour of UHC, or if it was a morally depraved shareholder body that actually wants the company to be more anti-consumer, is absolutely insane.
Is this the Late stage capitalism version of the Turing test?
Is this the Late stage capitalism version of the Turing test?
Nailed it.
The group, which is seeking unspecified damages, argued that the public backlash prevented the company from pursuing "the aggressive, anti-consumer tactics that it would need to achieve" its earnings goals.
I'm willing to bet that the group who filed this suit has done so in order to point out UHC's "aggressive anti-consumer tactics."
I think so, because this is too pants-on-head crazy to make any sense otherwise. I wonder how many shares these people own and when they bought them.
Could be people who own through mutual funds. Could be people who bought a share in the wake of The Incident with the intention of filing such a suit.
Prevented them from pursuing anti-consumer tactics? Seriously bleak. I wouldn't expect anything less from shareholders in a health care insurance company in the United States.
I love that they're saying the quiet part out loud
Well, they've normalized and made overt cruelty a virtue over the last 40 years through mass media.
Time to name and shame these shareholders.
fucking ghouls.
Fucking legends, if it’s more like “let’s make their anti-consumer tactics a material part of the suit and get internal communications in discovery.”
But you’re probably right.
they don't seem to be concerned about the policies themselves, just that scrutiny means they can't pursue those and because of that they can't meet the forecasts.
FTA:
The investors described this as “materially false and misleading,” pointing to the immense public scrutiny the company and the broader health insurance industry experienced in the wake of Thompson's killing.
The group, which is seeking unspecified damages, argued that the public backlash prevented the company from pursuing "the aggressive, anti-consumer tactics that it would need to achieve" its earnings goals.
"As such, the Company was deliberately reckless in doubling down on its previously issued guidance," the suit reads.
The company eventually revised its 2025 outlook on April 17, citing a needed shift in corporate strategy — a move that caused its stock to drop more than 22% that day.
"The company denies any allegations of wrongdoing and intends to defend the matter vigorously," a UnitedHealthcare spokesperson said in a statement.
Thompson's fatal shooting on the streets of New York City in broad daylight sent shockwaves across the nation.
Luigi Mangione, the 27-year-old man accused of the killing, has pleaded not guilty to federal and state charges against him. The legal defense fund for Mangione surpassed the $1 million mark in donations on Tuesday.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC
It ended all hope. Now everybody's just screaming into the void.
So the shareholders are declaring that Thompson’s killing successfully disrupted the company’s “aggressive anti-consumer tactics”.
It’s almost like they’re trying to encourage more of the same.
Fucking disgusting. Shareholders are a plague upon the Earth.
The language used in the lawsuit makes it sound like these shareholders are trying to highlight that UHC has to engage in anti-coksumer practices in order to reach their profit goals. We don't know anything about who they are. Doesn't take much to be a shareholder
This could definitely be a lawsuit to draw public attention to UHC's anti-consumer practices. It's really all that makes sense.
Them and voters.
You can thank Milton Friedman. The MBA patron saint.
This (the suit) is a glorious bit of trolling, meant to keep UHC's evildoing high up there in people's newsfeeds. It provides clickbait headlines and tasty bits of content (much more to come I hope) like "aggressive, anti-consumer tactics" that will keep the sharing machine running and the victim complaints in full view.
This is brilliant, I wish I'd thought of the tactic. The class members have to own at least a share of stock while still being able to sleep at night. Where do you find such martyrs?
There’s got to be a name for this kind of method. I had a similar insight. I want to run for a public office as an independent and have one of my initial campaign pushes be about how I am the first openly gay person to run for that office.
The person currently holding that office is openly gay. However, he is very comfortable and no longer makes a point about it anymore now that he has a secure seat. I have no interest in holding that office. I just want to make him talk about it.
I as a working class, gay man. I am quite disgusted with the Palm Springs homosexuals who hide behind their wealth now that we have achieved a modicum of social acceptance. The fight is far from over for people who have to work for a living, so I thought about this as a way to just get people talking again about the needs of people who don’t fit the standard molds.
It’s not quite rat fucking but more the political equivalent of shit posting.
I kind of understand where they are coming from, though. They are accusing the company of not adjusting their projected earnings in the face of a clear negative outlook.
EDIT: The company delivered earnings projections before his death, and then after it they publicly stated their earnings projections would not change. They are accused of not disclosing clear risks to earnings by saying nothing will change.
Reposting top level to address "false flag" claims:
- https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/unitedhealth-group-lawsuit-ceo-investors-mangione-b2747303.html
- https://rosenlegal.com/
- https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/unitedhealthcare-shareholders-class-action.pdf
While there’s certainly nothing conclusive there, I’m not really sure I see the point? When the murder first happened, there were already all sorts of talking points about UHC having twice the national average of denials while pocketing billions in wealth and using AI.
When you ask me who is angrier and has more legal capacity to take this kind of action, I’m gonna go with the shareholders. The American people should be the angrier party, but it’s a lot more abstract for them. Shareholders lost MILLIONS. Because, as the filing says, they didn’t make appropriate adjustments to reflect the reality of that situation.
Biggest point of contention here is the language used and it’s ugly, but it’s direct. People can make false flag claims without evidence until the cows come home, but I don’t smell it here.
The group, [...] argued that the public backlash prevented the company from pursuing “the aggressive, anti-consumer tactics that it would need to achieve” its earnings goals.
Sorry, am I missing something here or is this them saying the quiet part out loud?
I read this as "Investors are annoyed that public backlash prevented UHG from fucking over, and in some cases KILLING their customers, and wanted the company to acknowledge sooner that they wouldn't be able to fuck over and kill their customers"
look at the face of this vacant idiot.
If you can deny help from someone, then I will defend the thing that Luigi (allegedly) done.
Ok lol. Amazing.