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 36

Georgetown Prevails In ERISA Fee Litigation Case
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • February 12 2019

A federal district court in the District of Columbia dismissed ERISA fiduciary-breach claims by participants in Georgetown’s 403(b) retirement plans


ERISA Doesn’t Preempt Nevada Law Limiting General Contractors’ Obligations To Pay Delinquent Contributions
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • September 17 2018

The Ninth Circuit recently held that ERISA does not preempt a Nevada state law that curtailed the ability of multiemployer plans to recover unpaid


ERISA’s Six-Year Statute of Repose for Fiduciary-Breach Claims Can Be Tolled
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • November 1 2017

The Eleventh Circuit ruled that ERISA’s six-year statute of repose can be tolled by the parties even though it is a statute of repose. During


Are Taft-Hartley Boards Conflicted When Reviewing ERISA Benefits Determinations? Circuit Courts Are Split.
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • March 22 2017

Although it has been nearly three decades since the Supreme Court first explained the appropriate standard of review for ERISA benefit claims, there


How to settle an ERISA breach of fiduciary duty case and sleep at night: a checklist for plan trustees to consider
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • December 18 2014

Plan trustees often look to settle ERISA fiduciary breach claims brought against them as a way to put the past behind them. Assuming there is enough


"Surcharge" as monetary relief after Amara
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • September 9 2011

In CIGNA Corporation v. Amara, 131 S. Ct. 1866 (U.S. 2011), the Supreme Court held that ERISA plaintiffs who seek anything other than benefits pursuant to the governing plan document cannot assert their claims under ERISA Section 502(a)(1)(B).


Enforcement of oral agreements
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • April 11 2011

In Central States, Southeast and Southwest Areas Pension Fund v. Auffenberg Ford, Inc., --- F.3d ---, 2011 WL 832937 (7th Cir. Mar. 11, 2011), the court held that an oral understanding, even if later committed to writing, cannot alter an employer’s written agreement to make contribution payments to a multiemployer fund.


Rulings, filings and settlements of interest
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • November 3 2010

In Matschiner v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., 2010 WL 3910217 (8th Cir. Oct. 7, 2010), the Eighth Circuit applied the “plan documents rule” established by the Supreme Court in Kennedy v. Plan Administrator for DuPont Savings & Investment Plan, 129 S.Ct. 865 (2009), and concluded that Hartford properly paid benefits pursuant to a beneficiary designation form rather than a Nebraska state divorce decree that purported to divest the decedent’s ex-husband of his right to the benefits.


Rulings, filings and settlements of interest
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • October 13 2010

In Brown v. Owens Corning Investment Review Committee, 2010 WL 3730918 (6th Cir. Sept. 27, 2010), the Sixth Circuit affirmed dismissal, on statute of limitations grounds, of plaintiffs' claims against plan fiduciaries arising from employer stock holdings in two Owens Corning retirement plans.


Second Circuit holds Taft-Hartley funds are inherently conflicted when making benefit determinations
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • July 13 2010

In a case of first impression in the Second Circuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals held, in Durakovic v. Building Service 32 BJ Pension Fund, No. 09-3651-cv, 2010 WL 2519645 (2d Cir. June 24, 2010), that Taft-Hartley funds (administered by boards of trustees consisting of an equal number of union and employer representatives) are inherently conflicted when making benefit determinations because, like insurance companies and employers administering their self-insured plans, they both evaluate and pay claims.