We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 65

Parent corporate defendants exposed to liability in ERISA suit under veil-piercing theory
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • July 9 2010

The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware denied defendants’ motion to dismiss an Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) complaint, ruling among other things that plaintiffs properly alleged facts to reach the corporate parent defendants on a theory of piercing the corporate veil


Fiduciary insurance does not cover alleged COBRA violation
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • September 11 2009

An employer sponsor and administrator of a group health benefits plan was sued for alleged violations of its fiduciary duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) and the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA


Businesses under common control jointly and severally liable for ERISA withdrawal
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • July 24 2009

Plaintiff Unite National Retirement Fund, a multiemployer employee pension plan (the Plan), brought an action for withdrawal liability, pursuant to Sections 4201 through 4225 and 4301 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), as amended by the Multiemployer Pension Plan Amendments Act of 198 (MPPAA), against Ariela USA, Inc


401(k) plan defeats “stock rise” challenge
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • February 22 2008

In the last few years, 401(k) and other retirement plans that allow investment in the employer’s stock have faced a wave of “stock drop” litigation


Supreme Court allows favorable employer stock ruling to stand
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • November 2 2012

The US Supreme Court recently declined to review the “stock drop” cases decided late last year by the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit involving Citigroup and McGraw-Hill


MetLife v. Glenn: Supreme Court cautions on conflicted fiduciaries deciding claims
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • June 30 2008

On June 19, 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Glenn (“Glenn”


U.S. Supreme Court addresses conflicts of interest in deciding benefit claims
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • June 27 2008

Sponsors and administrators of employee benefit plans subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) should consider the effect of the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 19 decision in Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Glenn, which has implications for plan administration and governance


Defense of Marriage Act ruling has multiple effects on benefit plans
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • June 28 2013

On June 26, the US Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Windsor that Section 3 of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional


Court refuses to lift PSLRA discovery stay
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • April 18 2008

Plaintiffs brought a shareholder derivative action, claiming the officers and directors of Asyst Technologies, Inc. (Asyst) violated federal and state securities law by backdating stock options and making false filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission


Supreme Court rules summary plan descriptions are not "terms" under ERISA
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
  • USA
  • May 20 2011

On May 16, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long-awaited opinion in the case of Cigna Corp. v. Amara