Restriction of venue in ERISA plansBy William H. MayerEmployee Benefits, June 2018Although the law is unsettled, there are strong arguments in favor of permitting a reasonable restriction of venue clause despite the U.S. Department of Labor's continued opposition.
US Department of Labor issues final disability claim procedure rulesBy Steve Flores & Marissa SimsInsurance Law, September 2017Employers who sponsor employee benefit plans that provide disability benefits will need to revisit policies and procedures, plan documents, summary plan descriptions and claim-related notices in light of final regulations that apply to claims for disability benefits made on or after January 1, 2018.
US Department of Labor issues final disability claim procedure rulesBy Steve Flores & Marissa SimsEmployee Benefits, September 2017Employers who sponsor employee benefit plans that provide disability benefits will need to revisit policies and procedures, plan documents, summary plan descriptions and claim-related notices in light of final regulations that apply to claims for disability benefits made on or after January 1, 2018.
Investment advisors subject to the fiduciary standard or the suitability standard (Part I)By Kelli E. MadiganBusiness and Securities Law, May 2016Newly proposed Department of Labor rules include a modification of the existing “fiduciary standard” under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. The expanded definition of fiduciary would now include many investment advisors, such as 401K plan advisors, IRA investment advisors, broker-dealers and insurance agents, to whom the fiduciary standard did not previously apply.
What practitioners and plan fiduciaries need to know about Tibble v. Edison InternationalBy Steve FloresEmployee Benefits, July 2015In this case, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that ERISA's six-year statute of limitations for claims of fiduciary breach applies to both the initial selection of a plan investment and the ongoing monitoring of that plan investment.
ERISA to the rescue: Preemption of state law prevailsBy James Baker, Douglas Darch, & Miriam G. PetrilloEmployee Benefits, April 2015The recent case of Sherfel v. Newson reinforces the existing interpretation of ERISA and highlights the challenges facing multi-state employers.
Paid sick time laws sweep the nationBy Jenni FieldEmployee Benefits, April 2015Employers with locations in multiple jurisdictions with paid sick leave laws will have to craft separate sick leave policies for each location.
Supreme Court update—The day the ERISA presumption of prudence diedBy James BakerEmployee Benefits, April 2015ERISA plaintiffs’ lawyers have a new hill to climb—framing ERISA fiduciary breach claims that comport with the insider trading restrictions contained in federal securities laws.
Federal case updateBy Michael BartolicEmployee Benefits, January 2015Recent cases of interest.
Smith v. Aegon Companies Pension Plan: Enforceability of venue selection clausesBy Nancy G. Ross & Samuel P. MylerEmployee Benefits, December 2014While some district courts, such as the Northern District of Illinois in Coleman v. Supervalu, Inc. Short Term Disability Program have agreed with plan participants that venue selection clauses are inconsistent with ERISA, the Sixth Circuit’s recent 2-1 decision in Smith v. Aegon Companies Pension Plan lends strong support for the prevailing view among the district courts that such clauses are enforceable.
The “construction exemption” for contractor unfunded pension withdrawal liabilityBy Stanley N. WasserConstruction Law, October 2014A look at some of the basic concepts that must be understood for advising construction contractor clients whether the “construction exemption” will protect their client from unfunded pension withdrawal liability.
Five proven tactics to minimize ERISA litigation riskBy James Baker & Lisa BroganEmployee Benefits, June 2014Companies can improve their employee benefit plan offerings and, at the same time, minimize ERISA litigation risk by making small changes to their employee benefit plan documents.
A warning to public sector employers: ERISA can apply to youBy Benjamin E. GehrtEmployee Benefits, June 2014Many HR professionals, elected officials, and even some attorneys share a common belief: ERISA does not apply to public sector employers. Unfortunately, they are wrong.
Time is not relative for ERISA statutes of limitationBy James Baker & Lisa BroganEmployee Benefits, May 2014On Dec. 16, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court announced that an Employee Retirement Income Security Act plan’s own contractual time period for contesting plan benefit disputes is enforceable.
Federal case updateBy Michael BartolicEmployee Benefits, February 2014Recent cases of interest to employee benefits practitioners.
A summary of the anti-cutback ruleBy Patrick M. ColganEmployee Benefits, February 2014A brief overview of some of the components that have been included in a court’s analysis of the anti-cutback rule including examples of that analysis.
Federal successor liability under ERISA and the MPPAABy Donald S. Rothschild & Brian M. DoughertyLabor and Employment Law, July 2013This article will explore the history of ERISA and the MPPAA, how successor liability has evolved under federal law and what needs to be proven in order to hold a successor company liable for withdrawal liability.
The evolving and murky world of ERISA damages . . . . I mean equitable remediesBy Glenn R. GaffneyFederal Civil Practice, March 2013This article outlines the court’s evolving use of equitable terms and concepts so as to provide jilted plan beneficiaries with make-whole relief resulting in a monetary judgment under ERISA’s statutory provision of “other appropriate equitable relief.”
Case update: In Re: Citigroup ERISA LitigationBy Maria M. GonzalezEmployee Benefits, November 2011The In Re: Citigroup decision contains the most substantive discussion of the Court’s analysis addressing the legal standard governing breach of fiduciary duty claims brought against plan administrators of 401(k), ESOP and other forms of eligible individual account plans that maintain company stock in the plan when there is a substantial decline in price of the stock.
CIGNA Corp. v. Amara case updateBy Richard TothEmployee Benefits, September 2011The case signals a likely expansion of the remedies under ERISA’s § 502(a)(3), which provides for “appropriate equitable relief.”