PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Can Employers Impose a Health Insurance Surcharge on Plan Participants Not Vaccinated for COVID-19?
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas issued its written decision in Shipp v. Central States Manufacturing, Inc. on July 5, 2024, declining to dismiss the case against Central States Manufacturing Inc....more
A U.S. District Court judge threw out a case against Microsoft which claimed that the BlackRock LifePath Index Funds suite of target-date funds was an imprudent investment choice for their plan participants....more
The DOL’s expanded definition of fiduciary advice is described in the preamble to PTE 2020-02. The PTE then provides relief for conflicted non-discretionary recommendations (for example, rollover recommendations), if its...more
In Hawkins, et al. v. Cintas Corp., No. 21-3156, __ F.4d __ (2022), plaintiffs brought a class action pursuant to Section 502(a)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), alleging that their former employer...more
Key Takeaways - ..Mishandling of premiums can lead to breach of fiduciary duty claims under ERISA against employers. ..Information beyond what is required to be disclosed by ERISA may need to be provided by plan...more
A client recently reviewed a census of participants in its deferred compensation plan and found that the covered group amounted to nearly 15% of its total workforce. Mindful of the need to limit the number of participants in...more
As costly class action retirement plan litigation under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) proliferates, mandatory individual arbitration has become an increasingly appealing alternative for certain benefit...more
In the first decision since the Supreme Court’s ruling in Hughes v. Northwestern Univ., No. 19-1401, 595 U.S. ___ (U.S. Jan. 24, 2022), a Georgia federal district court held in favor of plaintiffs and declined to dismiss...more
On January 24, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Hughes v. Northwestern University that establishing and offering a broad range of investment options for a participant-directed retirement plan does not ensure...more
Welcome to Goodwin’s ERISA Litigation Update. Litigation involving ERISA-governed benefits plans has exploded in recent years. Lawyers in our award-winning ERISA Litigation practice have extensive experience litigating these...more
A lot of talk in political circles surround politicians using fighting words. I’m not a politician and I don’t like to use my space for that....more
A district court decision in March has added to the sparse authority regarding the status of participant data under ERISA, particularly whether recordkeepers or other providers can use that data to offer additional products...more
It is important to note that, since this guidance was issued in the late days of the Trump administration, the Biden administration will likely review this guidance. It is not uncommon for guidance to be delayed, revised,...more
On January 12, 2021, the Department of Labor (DOL) issued a 3-part set of missing participant guidance for employer-sponsored retirement plans, addressing a variety of issues...more
The Department of Labor’s Proposed Prohibited Transaction Exemption and Its Impact on Recommendations to Plans, Participants and IRAs (Part 3): Investment Adviser Considerations - On December 18, 2020, the DOL issued its...more
On January 18, we published a blog post regarding new Department of Labor (“DOL”) guidance on missing plan participants. That post is available here, and describes the DOL’s guidance on Missing Participants - Best Practices...more
In a recent 5–4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court shut the door on defined-benefit plan participants’ standing to sue under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA)....more
The U.S. Supreme Court (in Thole v. U.S. Bank N.A., available here) recently held that participants in a defined benefit pension plan who have been paid all their monthly pension benefits to date lack standing to sue for...more
In a recent 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court, in Thole v. U.S. Bank N.A., 590 U.S. __ (2020), held that participants in defined benefit pension plans lack standing to sue plan fiduciaries for allegedly imprudent plan...more
In Thole v. U.S. Bank, a 5-4 Supreme Court decision issued on June 1, the Court held that retired participants in a defined benefit pension plan lack constitutional standing to sue the plan fiduciaries for alleged breach of...more
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 1, 2020 in Thole v. U.S. Bank that a participant in a defined benefit (“DB”) plan is constitutionally barred from bringing a fiduciary-breach (or similar) claim under the...more
The United States Supreme Court recently reviewed the federal constitutional standing requirements for members of a private defined-benefit pension plan who alleged that the plan trustees violated their fiduciary duties. ...more
On June 1, 2020, the United States Supreme Court, in an opinion by Justice Kavanaugh and joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito and Gorsuch, held that plaintiffs—participants of a defined-benefit pension...more
In Thole v. U.S. Bank, N.A., the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed, in a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit's judgment that defined benefit plan participants lack standing to pursue claims of fiduciary...more
In Thole v. U.S. Bank, the Supreme Court held that defined benefit plan participants who are receiving their full pension benefit lack constitutional standing to bring a lawsuit alleging that the plan fiduciaries breached...more