Podcast: Supreme Court May Resolve Key ERISA Statute of Limitations and Proprietary Fund Litigation Questions
This OnPoint is the first in a series that will examine important trends and developments in class action litigation under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). Here, we look at the current litigation...more
Since its adoption the Employee Retirement Income Securities Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”), has required employee benefit plan sponsors to make disclosures regarding plan terms and plan expenses. The most well-known of...more
Supreme Court decisions are often the most challenging pieces of legal guidance to understand. They are rarely straightforward and usually contain so much analysis that it becomes hard to get to the bottom of what was...more
On February 26, 2020, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Intel Corp. Inv. Policy Comm. v. Sulyma, __. U.S. __, 140 S. Ct. 768 (2020). The Court unanimously held that Christopher Sulyma ("Sulyma") did not necessarily...more
In a unanimous decision in the Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma case, the Supreme Court refused to limit the timeframe in which participants could bring a lawsuit challenging the investment decisions made by...more
On February 26, 2020, the Supreme Court held that the term “actual knowledge” in the ERISA statute of limitations clause found in 29 U.S.C. §1113(2), ERISA §413 applicable to breach of fiduciary duty cases means “what it...more
Under Section 413(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), ERISA’s three-year statute of limitations for fiduciary breaches and certain other violations starts to run when “the plaintiff had actual...more
As discussed in an earlier post on this blog, in Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee et al. v. Sulyma, No. 18-1116 (Feb. 26, 2020), the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the statute of limitations for breach of fiduciary...more
The United States Supreme Court unanimously decided last week that a plan participant who received written disclosures about the plan’s investments, but does not remember reading them, does not necessarily have “actual...more
In its February 26, 2020, unanimous decision in Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split regarding what constitutes “actual knowledge” for purposes of...more
Last Wednesday, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court concluded that receipt of participant disclosures and notices does not constitute “actual knowledge” of fees, investment options, and other plan features. Actual knowledge is the...more
The US Supreme Court recently decided a closely watched ERISA case against employers and fiduciaries. Under Section 413 of ERISA, the statute of limitations for a fiduciary breach claim is shortened from six years to three...more
The Supreme Court in Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee et al. v. Sulyma, case No. 18–1116, significantly narrowed the circumstances in which a three-year statute of limitations would apply to a claim for breach of...more
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on February 26, 2020 that ERISA plaintiffs do not gain “actual knowledge” of fiduciary misconduct merely by receiving financial disclosures from the plan. The unanimous opinion in Intel Corp....more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On February 26, 2020, the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee, et al. v. Sulyma. 589 U.S. ___ (2020), holding that plan participants must...more
On February 26, 2020, the United States Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision by Justice Samuel Alito, held that for purposes of assessing the appropriate statute of limitations for a breach of fiduciary duty claim under the...more
Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee et al. v. Sulyma (case number 18-1116). The decision requires a participant to have “actual knowledge” in order to apply ERISA’s...more
Employers and plan fiduciaries should take careful note of a recent ruling issued by the United States Supreme Court which may prompt increased Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA") litigation and otherwise alter...more
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court just declined to limit the timeframe in which disgruntled employees could bring suit challenging the investment decisions made by plan fiduciaries. While the Employee Retirement...more
In a closely watched decision, Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma, Slip Op. No. 18-1116 (U.S. S. Ct., Feb. 26, 2020), construing ERISA’s three-year statute of limitations, see ERISA § 413(2), 29 U.S.C. §...more
On February 26, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma, holding that, for purposes of ERISA’s three-year statute of limitations, a plan beneficiary does not have “actual...more
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court has found that disclosing information regarding benefit plans to participants does not necessarily shorten the statute of limitations for filing a fiduciary breach claim under ERISA....more
On December 4, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in Intel Corp. Inv. Policy Comm. v. Sulyma, 139 S. Ct. 2692 (2019). The question presented is whether the three year limitations period in 29 U.S.C. § 1113(2),...more
Editor's Overview - Happy New Year. We wrap-up 2019 with an article that reflects on significant developments in ERISA litigation during 2019, and takes a look at what's on the horizon for 2020. The courts (at all levels)...more