Update and Discussion on Legal and Practical Issues
A Supreme Court decision in April made it easier for plaintiffs to keep ERISA prohibited transaction claims in play longer, and just days later a rare ERISA trial resulted in a huge win for a class of 401(k) plan...more
On August 29, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a 401(k) plan participant’s claims that plan fiduciaries mismanaged the $1.1 billion 401(k) plan and charged participants...more
The Supreme Court told defined contribution sponsors Monday that they have to monitor all investments in plans’ lineups rather than leave the analysis to participants....more
On January 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down an important decision affecting plan fiduciaries who select investment options available to participants in a self-directed employee retirement plan (such as a 401(k)...more
On January 24, 2022, in a rare, unanimous 8-0 decision (Justice Barrett recused herself from the case), the Supreme Court of the United States (the “Supreme Court”) vacated a Seventh Circuit affirmation of the dismissal of...more
In Hughes v. Northwestern University, current and former participants in Northwestern University's defined-contribution retirement plans filed litigation on behalf of the plans' participants asserting that the University, its...more
Last week, on January 24, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Hughes v. Northwestern University, unanimously holding that retirement plan fiduciaries have a duty to continuously monitor retirement...more
On Monday, Jan. 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an important decision dealing with defined contribution retirement plans. These plans, which include 401(k) plans, provide an array of investment choices from which...more
KEY TAKEAWAYS - ..Plan fiduciaries have a duty of prudence to independently evaluate on an ongoing basis investments offered in a plan’s menu of options and remove any imprudent ones. ..Plan participants’ ultimate...more
On January 24, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion, ruled in Hughes v. Northwestern University that offering an array of allegedly prudent investment choices within the plan does not serve as a categorial defense...more
In what may be one of the shortest decisions this term, the Supreme Court handed down a unanimous six-page opinion on January 24, 2022 in Hughes v. Northwestern University. Vacating the Seventh Circuit’s decision, the Court...more
On January 24, 2022, in a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court in Hughes v. Northwestern reinstated the long-running case against Northwestern University by sending the case back to the lower courts for further review. ...more
Summary - The U.S. Supreme Court this week unanimously decided an ERISA fiduciary duty case, Hughes v. Northwestern University, which will impact dozens of similar cases currently pending against fiduciaries of section...more
The Second Circuit sent shock waves through the community of ERISA stock-drop practitioners late last year in Jander v. Retirement Plans Committee of IBM by finding plan participants had plausibly alleged a breach of duty of...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: As profiled in our recent publication of the 13th Annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report, the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings have a profound impact on employers and the tools they may utilize to...more
In recent years, plaintiffs’ lawyers have brought numerous ERISA breach of fiduciary duty lawsuits against employers that offer employer stock funds in their 401(k) plans. These lawsuits are typically brought on behalf of...more
An employer has fiduciary duties with respect to the 401(k) plan it provides its employees. Those duties include the obligation to choose prudent investment options and to consider the fees associated with service providers...more
Factual Background - As described in greater detail in the December 18, 2014 edition of the ELU, this case involves claims for breach of fiduciary duty when two 401(k) plans remained invested in the employer stock at a...more
Editor's Overview - In this month's newsletter, Anthony Cacace analyzes the heavily anticipated Supreme Court ruling in Tibble v. Edison Intl., 135 S. Ct. 1823 (2015), where the Court held that ERISA's fiduciary duty of...more
In This Issue: - For Retirement Plan Providers, It's All About Making A Connection - DOL Comment Period Extended - Supreme Trouble with Tibbles - My Referrals Aren't For Sale And Neither Should Yours ...more
The Supreme Court’s decision will undermine a plan fiduciary’s ability to assert a statute of limitations defense based on when an investment option was added; rather, the six year statute of limitations will be measured from...more
In Tibble v. Edison International, the U.S. Supreme Court expanded the scope of the duty of prudence owed by ERISA fiduciaries. Although ostensibly a case about the statute of limitations, the Court ruled that trustees of...more
This week’s decision by the United States Supreme Court in Tibble v. Edison International, 2015 U.S. LEXIS 3171 (May 18, 2015), is expected to trigger an increase in lawsuits against 401(k) plan fiduciaries....more
While the Supreme Court ruled in the monumental 401(k) case Tibble v. Edison that mostly dealt with statute of limitations issues, one could read something into it a little more. Tibble was the case where the District...more
On May 18, 2015, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held in Tibble v. Edison International1 that fiduciaries who select investment options for 401(k) plans have a continuing duty under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act...more