In a significant decision for employers, plan administrators, and ERISA practitioners, the Ninth Circuit’s recent ruling in Zavislak v. Netflix, Inc. reaffirms a narrow interpretation of the disclosure requirements under ERISA Section 104(b)(4) and offers insight into how courts may treat compliance delays during extraordinary circumstances.
The contours of plaintiff pleading requirements for ERISA fiduciary breach claims sketched by the Supreme Court in Hughes v. Northwestern University continue to evolve. Recent cases suggest that plaintiffs may find ERISA class action lawsuits increasingly vulnerable to motions to dismiss unless they allege context specific defects in the processes followed by defined contribution plan
To survive a motion to dismiss after Hughes v. Northwestern University, plaintiffs will have to allege facts showing the plan fiduciaries have not followed a prudent process in making decisions specific to the circumstances when the decision was made.
Click here to read the full article, published by the New York Law Journal March
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Jan. 24 in Hughes et al. v Northwestern University et al. that in litigation challenging fiduciaries of benefit plans that allegedly have imprudent investment options, determining whether plan fiduciaries meet ERISA’s duty of prudence requires a context-specific analysis.
![employee-benefits-[1]](https://gtlawlaborandemployment.gtlawplatform.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/33/2021/12/employee-benefits-1.jpg)
California and North Carolina district courts have dismissed major class action challenges to AT&T and Lowe’s 401(k) plan recordkeeping fees based on extensive step-by-step documentation that the plan fiduciaries acted prudently in monitoring the plan’s recordkeeping expenses.
These cases provide a useful guide for the type of evidence needed in ERISA breach of fiduciary claims
With the pandemic continuing to impact every-day operations of most businesses, opportunities to take advantage of the flexible spending account relief offered in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (“CAA”), passed at the end of December 2020, may not be top of mind for most employers. However, the numerous considerable benefits created by the CAA
On Sept. 14, 2020, New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law S2380, which creates a rebuttable presumption of workers’ compensation coverage for Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases contracted by “essential employees” during the ongoing public health emergency. The law took effect immediately, and applies retroactively to March 9, 2020, when the governor first
Whether the 5-4 Supreme Court decision in Thole vs. U.S. Bank on June 1 is “good news” for employers and will limit lawsuits by defined benefit participants, as some commentators have forecast, remains to be seen. From the perspective of advising fiduciaries how to discharge their responsibilities and avoid litigation, however, what the majority opinion
San Francisco employment attorney Charles O. Thompson has moved to global law firm Greenberg Traurig, LLP as a shareholder, further strengthening the firm’s Global Labor and Employment Practice. Thompson, a seasoned employment trial lawyer, was formerly managing partner of Polsinelli’s San Francisco office and chair of its Class Action Practice. He has extensive experience
Shareholder Todd D. Wozniak, of global law firm Greenberg Traurig, LLP, was named a 2018 Law360 MVP for Benefits. Law360’s MVP series showcases standout attorneys who have had significant client wins and contributions to their practice area in the last year.
Co-Chair of the firm’s ERISA & Employee Benefits Litigation group, Wozniak has