The LaRue Decision: A Mountain of Individual ERISA Lawsuits or Not? discusses LaRue v. DeWolff, Boberg & Assoc. Inc., No. 06-856 (Feb. 20, 2008). It discusses the procedural history, provides analysis, and shares some concluding remarks.
More importantly for plan sponsors, though, the Supreme Court has been careful to avoid creating a potential new "hot topic" for plaintiffs' law firms by refusing to rule on an ERISA § 502(a)(3) cash windfall to participants in Mr. LaRue's shoes. While this restraint is of some comfort to potential defendants, the limitations of the Supreme Court's holding and the apparent further limitations expressed in dicta have left both potential plaintiffs and defendants in doubt as to the future viability of these lawsuits. It is likely that the next several years will see a round of ERISA § 502(a)(2) lawsuits filed on behalf of 401(k) plan participants as plaintiffs take advantage of LaRue's core holding; however, it is also likely that future decisions will limit the causes of action and the remedies available to successful plaintiffs past the comfort level of all but the most determined of litigants.
In addition to the denial of benefit claim under ERISA Section 502(a)(1)(B) and fiduciary breach claim under ERISA Section 502(a)(2), which are discussed on our LaRue information page, the article discusses an appropriate equitable relief claim under ERISA Section 502(a)(3) and notes that the Court refused to make a ruling.
0 comments:
Post a Comment