The Supreme Court of the United States has held many times that the federal courts do not have jurisdiction over a lawsuit unless the plaintiff has standing to sue under the federal Constitution. To have standing, the Court...more
6/5/2020
/ Article III ,
Breach of Duty ,
Defined Benefit Plans ,
Duty of Loyalty ,
Duty of Prudence ,
Employee Benefits ,
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) ,
Fiduciary Duty ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Investment Adviser ,
Mismanagement ,
Pensions ,
Plan Participants ,
Retirement Plan ,
SCOTUS ,
Standing ,
Thole v U.S. Bank
Employees - particularly healthcare employees - are increasingly refusing to work because of safety concerns and the need for accommodations related to COVID-19. In certain circumstances, these refusals may trigger...more
Late last year, we wrote about Shore v. The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Hospital Authority, et al., in which former Atrium Health employees filed a putative class action in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North...more
10/16/2019
/ 401k ,
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) ,
Employer Group Health Plans ,
Exempt Organizations ,
Failure To State A Claim ,
Federal Rule 12(b)(1) ,
Federal Rule 12(b)(6) ,
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Nonprofits ,
Pensions ,
Putative Class Actions ,
Retirement Plan ,
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
In Dorman v. Charles Schwab Corp., No. 18-15281 (August 20, 2019), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that a 401(k) plan participant was required to individually arbitrate his claims regarding the plan’s fees...more
8/30/2019
/ 401k ,
Arbitration ,
Benefit Plan Sponsors ,
Breach of Duty ,
Class Action Arbitration Waivers ,
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) ,
Fiduciary Duty ,
Motion to Compel ,
NLRA ,
Prohibited Transactions ,
Putative Class Actions ,
Unenforceable Contract Terms
In late 2018, in Sulyma v. Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a plaintiff’s access to documents disclosing an alleged breach of fiduciary duty did not trigger the...more
In Gaylor v. Mnuchin, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that a tax code exemption for religious housing of ministers does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution....more
The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, applying de novo review due to California’s discretionary clause ban, ruled that an employee of Apple, Inc. was not entitled to long-term disability benefits...more
In Sulyma v. Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that having access to documents disclosing an alleged breach of fiduciary duty is not sufficient to trigger the...more
Having settled many of its attacks on pension plans sponsored by several large church-affiliated healthcare organizations, the plaintiff’s bar appears to be shifting focus to pension and welfare benefit plans maintained by a...more