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 75

Department of Labor Officially Proposes Delaying Fiduciary Rule’s Exemptions for 18 Months
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • August 31 2017

On August 30, 2017, the Department of Labor (“DOL”) officially proposed delaying the applicability date of exemptions to its fiduciary rule until


NY Court Of Appeals Rejects No-Opt Out Class Action Settlement In Shareholder Litigation
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • May 6 2016

In Jinnaras v. Alfant, decided on May 5, 2015, the New York Court of Appeals rejected a proposed settlement of a shareholder class action, where the


Prospects for avoiding ERISA class actions with arbitration agreements
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • October 12 2012

It is well established that plan sponsors and fiduciaries may require plan participants and beneficiaries to participate in mandatory, binding arbitration as a means to prosecute claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.


The Affordable Care Act and its coverage mandates for employers: a potent recipe for ERISA class actions
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • August 20 2012

Although the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) has engendered much controversy (pro and con) in the business community, one area that has received less discussion is whether ACA may increase employers’ exposure to high-stakes class action litigation.


2011 the year in review: last year's most significant erisa litigation opinions and what they foreshadow for 2012
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • January 10 2012

There were many important opinions issued in 2011 that will influence ERISA litigation trends this year.


Attorney’s fees
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • November 7 2011

In Adler v. Raynor, No.1:09-cv-08877 (DLC) (THK), 2011 WL 5024412 (S.D.N.Y. October 20, 2011), the magistrate judge issued a ruling denying an application for recovery of $1.7 million in attorneys’ fees following the settlement of a class action complaint alleging breaches of fiduciary duty arising from the use of certain investment products that were alleged to be imprudent and constitute prohibited transactions because of their affiliation with the Plan sponsor.


Déjà vu the Seventh Circuit again rules in an excessive fee case, expanding on Hecker v. Deere, and taking a leading role in the field
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • October 5 2011

This month, we examine two recent circuit court opinions.


Bacon v. Stiefel Laboratories: court denies class certification of ERISA claims based on finding that individual reliance must be proved11
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • September 9 2011

In Bacon v. Stiefel Laboratories, No. 09-cv-21871, 2011 WL 2973677 (S.D. Fla. July 21, 2011),12 a federal district court denied plaintiffs' motion for class certification in a lawsuit alleging that plan fiduciaries and the corporate plan sponsor breached their fiduciary duties under ERISA and federal securities laws by, among other things, allegedly engaging in a fraudulent scheme to convince plaintiffs to sell their shares in the company to defendants in advance of a merger that would yield large profits for shareholders.


Rulings, filings, and settlements of interest
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • September 9 2011

In Florida v. United States Dep't of Health and Human Servs., 11-11021-cv, 2011 WL 3519178 (11th Cir. Aug. 12, 2011), the Eleventh Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court's ruling that the Affordable Care Act was unconstitutional.


Rulings, filings, and settlements of interest
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • August 5 2011

In Thomas More Law Center v. Obama, 10-2388-cv, 2011 WL 2556039 (6th Cir. June 29, 2011), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s decision, holding that the Affordable Care Act’s minimum coverage provision, which requires that all applicable individuals maintain minimum essential heath insurance coverage or pay a fine, was constitutional pursuant to Congress’s power to regulate interstate commerce.