By Darren E. Nadel In Nationwide Life Insurance Co. v. Haddock, No. 10-4237 (2d Cir. February 6, 2012) [pdf], the Second Circuit reversed a district court order granting class certification. The plaintiffs in Haddock assert that Nationwide breached its fiduciary duty under ERISA by allegedly collecting “revenue sharing payments” from mutual funds that Nationwide selected… Continue Reading
Category Archives: Employee Benefits Litigation
Subscribe to Employee Benefits Litigation RSS FeedConnecticut Federal District Court Holds that Jury Trial May Be Available Under ERISA
By Daniel W. Srsic In Healthcare Strategies, Inc. v. ING Life Insurance & Annuity Co., [pdf.] the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut refused to strike a demand for jury trial with respect to a claim for relief it categorized as “legal” rather than “equitable.” In this case, a plan administrator contracted with… Continue Reading
Pennsylvania Court Holds That Trustees May File Mechanics’ Lien to Obtain Delinquent Contributions to Health and Pension Funds
By Susan Katz Hoffman and Matthew J. Hank In Bricklayers of Western Pennsylvania Combined Funds, Inc. v. Scott’s Development Company, [pdf.] an en banc panel of the Superior Court of Pennsylvania held that the trustees of employee benefit funds may assert mechanics’ liens against a property owner to recoup delinquent contributions owed by a contractor. … Continue Reading
Claims Review Procedures Must Be in Plan Document (Not Just SPD) Post-Amara, District Court Holds
By Danielle K. Herring In Kaufmann v. Prudential Insurance Company of America, a New Hampshire district court reasoned that a 180-day administrative appeal deadline stated in an ERISA plan’s summary plan description (SPD) — but not the plan document — was unenforceable and, thus, could not serve as a legitimate basis to challenge whether a… Continue Reading
Conflict Discovery Post-Glenn: Court Allows Short Depositions to Proceed Based on Something Less Than Good Cause
By Deidre A. Grossman In Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Glenn, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved an issue dividing federal courts for decades when it ruled that the inherent conflict of interest affecting insurance companies that both decide and pay ERISA benefit claims is a factor for courts to weigh in determining whether there has… Continue Reading
No Fiduciary Breach for Offering “Retail” Mutual Funds Among 401(k) Plan’s Investment Offerings
By Noah Lipschultz and Stefanie Kastrinsky In Loomis v. Exelon, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit held that a plan administrator did not breach its ERISA fiduciary duties by offering “retail” mutual funds with higher administrative fees, instead of only “institutional” mutual funds, as part of its 401(k) investment line-up. In coming to this… Continue Reading
Absent Facts Showing Knowledge of Alleged Misrepresentations, Court Dismisses ERISA Stock Drop Lawsuit
By Wesley Stockard Recently the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed an ERISA “stock drop” litigation case against Nokia, Inc., its Board of Directors and its eligible individual account plan (“EIAP”) committee stemming from a dramatic drop in the value of the stock of Nokia Corp. – Nokia, Inc.’s parent… Continue Reading
The Latest in a Series of ERISA “Checkbook” Cases
By Melanie A. Houghton Beginning late last year, a number of lawsuits, now commonly known as “checkbook” cases, appeared on the federal docket. While each of these cases is somewhat different on the facts, they share a common basic scenario: Upon the death of an insured, the life insurance company creates an account for the… Continue Reading
Despite Alleged “Sham” Divorces, Plan Administrators Must Take Domestic Relations Orders at Face Value
By Stefanie Kastrinsky In Brown v. Continental Airlines, the Fifth Circuit held that when determining if a domestic relations order (DRO) meets ERISA’s requirements to be a qualified DRO (QDRO), the plan administrator is to take the DRO at face value and not investigate the parties’ underlying motivations or intent – even when the plan administrator… Continue Reading
Supreme Court Sends Pension Plan Case Back to Lower Court for Reconsideration
By Susan Katz Hoffman The Supreme Court has issued a decision in CIGNA Corp. v. Amara, (pdf) holding unanimously that section 502(a)(1)(B) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (the section allowing a participant to sue for benefits under an ERISA plan) did not permit the district court to rewrite the terms of the benefit… Continue Reading