Court Rulings

Updates

protected content UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health

Several members have recently requested an update on the latest regarding the Sutter case in California. The case brought by UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust against Sutter alleges that the company “uses its dominant economic power to compel network vendors to agree to anti-competitive terms in their provider agreements… More

Supreme Court Rules ERISA Preempts State Claims Reporting

We are pleased that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) preempts Vermont’s law to require the reporting of health claims paid by self-funded benefit plans. ERIC had argued the same point in an amicus brief filed in October 2015… More

protected content Supreme Court Rules ERISA Preempts State Claims Reporting in Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance

Today the U.S. Supreme Court released its decision in the case of Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company. The 6-2 decision, a profound relief to all multi-state employers with benefit plans, found that ERISA does preempt the effort by the state of Vermont to impose reporting requirements on self-funded ERISA plans… More

protected content SCOTUS limits ability of plans to recover in Montanile case

In a rather unsettling, although perhaps not totally unanticipated turn of events, the U.S. Supreme Court today decided in Montanile v. Board of Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Health Benefit Plan that a plan participant who had recovered funds from a suit over an auto accident was not obligated to reimburse the health plan that had initially covered his medical expenses from the accident because the participant had likely spent the funds he recovered. The case was, however, remanded to the district court to settle certain facts in the case… More

protected content Federal District Court Finds Certain Retiree Health Benefits Vested for Life

Last week, a Federal District Court in Michigan ruled that certain retirees who once had worked for the Kelsey-Hayes Company were entitled to lifetime retiree health benefits… More

See All Updates

Amicus Briefs

ERIC Urges Sixth Circuit to Apply “Ordinary Principles of Contract Interpretation” Concerning Vesting of Retiree Health Benefits

The ERISA Industry Committee filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit urging the court to apply “ordinary principles of contract interpretation” involving vesting of retiree health benefits following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in M&G Polymers USA, LLC v. Tackett. … More

protected content

Supreme Court Strikes Down Yard-Man and the 6th Circuit Court’s Stranglehold on Retiree Health Benefits

Today the Supreme Court of the United States in essence overturned the infamous UAW v. Yard-Man, Inc., decision of 1983 (and subsequent offspring), where the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit found that certain retirees had a vested right to their health benefits in the absence of extrinsic evidence to the contrary in a collective bargaining agreement. … More

ERIC Urges Supreme Court to Uphold Earlier Rulings Affirming ERISA’s Six-Year Statute of Limitations for Alleged Fiduciary Breach Claims

The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC), the leading trade association dedicated exclusively to the employee benefit and compensation interests of America’s largest companies, today filed with the U.S. Supreme Court an amicus brief in the Tibble v. Edison International case. … More

ERIC Files Amicus Brief in U.S. Supreme Court on Retiree Health Vesting Case

Please find below a link to an amicus brief filed today with the U.S. Supreme Court by ERIC and ABC in the M & G Polymers v. Tackett case. The brief was prepared jointly by Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Proskauer Rose LLP. … More

ERIC Urges Appeals Court to Overturn District Court’s Misapplication of Fiduciary Deference under ERISA Plan

The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) on June 18 filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit urging the court to overturn an earlier district court ruling that misapplied judicial precedent regarding the deference owed to a plan administrator’s reasonable interpretation of plan terms under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The case is Cottillion v. United Refining Company.… More

protected content ERIC Files Amicus Brief in Cottillion v. United Refining Company

ERIC, along with several other trade associations, earlier today filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Cottillion v. United Refining Company. The brief was prepared by Jenner & Block LLP.… More

ERIC Urges Supreme Court to Apply Presumption of Prudence in Plans with Company Stock

The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) on February 3 filed (with other trade associations) with the U.S. Supreme Court an amicus brief in the Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer case, urging the Court to apply the presumption of prudence at the pleading stage of a lawsuit. … More

ERIC Argues that Court Should Not Rewrite Plan Documents

The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC), along with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, on September 6 filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit an amicus brief in Osberg v. Foot Locker, Inc. The brief urged the Court to uphold the decision of the district court which dismissed the claims of plaintiffs seeking reformation of the plan and surcharge (effectively money damages) against a plan sponsor regarding the communication of their retirement plan amendment from a traditional defined benefit plan to a cash balance plan. … More

More Amicus Briefs

Court Rulings

protected content ERIC:  SCOTUS Rules That States Must Recognize Same-Sex Marriage

In the second of two eagerly-awaited decisions this week, Obergefell v. Hodges, the U.S. Supreme Court emphatically ruled that the Fourteenth Amendment requires states to license same-sex marriage and also requires states to recognize legal same-sex marriages performed out of the state’s jurisdiction. The 5-4 majority decision was written by Justice Kennedy and supported by Justices Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan. The official dissent was written by Chief Justice Roberts, although each of the three other justices (Scalia, Thomas, and Alito) also wrote dissents. … More

King v Burwell Decision
Large Employers To Congress:
Now That The Supreme Court Has Issued Its Health Care Decision, Let’s Fix The Underlying Law

American business cannot operate without legal and regulatory stability. The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) today said the Supreme Court removed a source of potential uncertainty in its decision in the King v. Burwell health care case. But the group said much legislative work is needed to fix the underlying law.… More

protected content Supreme Court Holds for Companies and Statements of Opinions/Corporate Filings

The Supreme Court recently ruled in support companies and statements in its corporate filings by holding that public companies are not liable for statements of opinions that turn out to be false. … More

protected content Oral Arguments in King v. Burwell:  They Came, They Spoke, They Sat Down Again

Oral arguments in King v. Burwell were heard on Wednesday, and few pundits have failed to render an opinion. To me, the bottom line is… More

protected content Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Tibble v. Edison International

The U.S. Supreme Court on February 24 heard oral arguments in Tibble v. Edison International involving whether a claim that fiduciaries breached their duty of prudence by offering higher-cost retail-class mutual funds to participants instead of institution-class mutual funds … More

protected content SCOTUS Declines to Take on Windstream Case, Permitting Reduction of Retiree Health Benefits

The U.S. Supreme Court on February 23 declined to rehear a decision from the 8th Circuit Court that basically left standing an action by Windstream Corporation to significantly reduce retiree health benefits … More

ERIC Urges Sixth Circuit to Apply “Ordinary Principles of Contract Interpretation” Concerning Vesting of Retiree Health Benefits

The ERISA Industry Committee filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit urging the court to apply “ordinary principles of contract interpretation” involving vesting of retiree health benefits following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in M&G Polymers USA, LLC v. Tackett. … More

protected content

Supreme Court Strikes Down Yard-Man and the 6th Circuit Court’s Stranglehold on Retiree Health Benefits

Today the Supreme Court of the United States in essence overturned the infamous UAW v. Yard-Man, Inc., decision of 1983 (and subsequent offspring), where the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit found that certain retirees had a vested right to their health benefits in the absence of extrinsic evidence to the contrary in a collective bargaining agreement. … More

protected content

Second Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Benefits Interference Claim under ERISA Seeking Same-Sex Spouse Coverage

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled that a proposed class of health plan participants seeking coverage for same-sex spouses cannot proceed with claims of fiduciary breach and benefit interference under ERISA. … More

protected content Second Circuit Rules for Plaintiffs in Amara v. Cigna

Earlier today the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the district court’s finding of plan reformation in Amara v. Cigna Corp.… More

Second Circuit Ruling in Amara v. CIGNA Corp.

Amara v. CIGNA Corp. … More

protected content ERIC and Epstein Becker Green Release Fall / Winter 2014 Edition of Benefits Litigation Update

ERIC earlier today released the latest edition of the Benefits Litigation Update, a joint project of ERIC and the law firm of Epstein Becker Green. … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Retiree Health Case

The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in the case of M&G Polymers USA, LLC v. Tackett, which involves when retiree health benefits are considered to be vested. … More

protected content Supreme Court Declines Review of Fiduciary Breach Claims in Tussey v. ABB

The U.S. Supreme Court recently announced that it will not hear the case of Tussey v. ABB, despite encouragement from the Solicitor of Labor to hear the case. The Tussey case involved whether deference should be limited to fiduciaries’ decisions that relate to benefit claims. … More

protected content Supreme Court Declines to Hear KeyCorp Stock Drop Case

The Supreme Court recently rejected certiorari in another stock drop case after its ruling in the Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer case last June. In an interesting variation from the Supreme Court’s decision in Dudenhoeffer … More

protected content SCOTUS Accepts ACA Exchange Subsidy Case for Review

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday decided to accept an appeal from a case decided by the 4th Circuit Court to debate, once again, a key provision of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). This time the issue before the Court will be whether individuals participating in federally run Exchanges (as opposed to state-run Exchanges) may receive federal tax subsidies for the purchase of health insurance … More

protected content

District Court Denies EEOC’s Request for Temporary Restraining Order and Injunction against Company Wellness Program

Today, the judge in the U.S. District Court in Minnesota denied EEOC’s request for a TRO/PI, finding that the Honeywell wellness program inflicted no “irreparable harm”. … More

protected content Sixth Circuit Allows Plan to Restrict Where Lawsuits Can Be Filed

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that a plan document can limit where participants can file suit. In Smith v. Aegon Companies Pension Plan, the participant retired in 2000 and began to receive benefits… More

protected content Court Approves Class Action and Reinstates Claim in Osberg v. Foot Locker

We wanted to update ERIC members on the latest developments in the Osberg v. Foot Locker case (in which ERIC previously filed an amicus brief on behalf of members with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals). … More

protected content Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Case on Monitoring Plan Investments

The U.S. Supreme Court has indicated that it will hear the case of Tibble v. Edison International, which involves the selection and monitoring of plan investments and the amount of fees related to those investments.… More

protected content

Oklahoma District Court Finds Individuals in Federal Exchanges Ineligible for Subsidized Coverage under ACA

The federal district court in Oklahoma today decided to vacate the IRS regulation under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that permits individuals in states with federal Exchanges to receive subsidized health insurance. … More

protected content Ninth Circuit Considers All Relevant Factors When Reviewing Fiduciary Decisions

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently examined the standard that applies when courts review a fiduciary’s benefit denial. The Court held that courts should consider “all of the relevant circumstances,” rather than upholding an administrator’s decision as long as it was reasonable.… More

protected content D.C. Circuit Court Agrees to Rehear ACA Case Involving Tax Subsidies

The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia announced September 4 that it will rehear the case involving whether tax subsidies are available for both the state-based and federally-run exchanges (Halbig v. Burwell).… More

protected content SOL Recommends That Supreme Court Decide Fiduciary Duty Case

The Solicitor of Labor recently recommended that the U.S. Supreme Court consider to what extent fiduciaries are required to monitor investments on an ongoing basis in Tibble v. Edison International. In the Tibble case, the participants alleged that the plan fiduciaries improperly included retail-class mutual funds as investment options and violated the plan’s terms by allowing revenue sharing. … More

protected content Fourth Circuit Examines Fiduciary Duties

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled in Tatum v. RJR Pension Investment Committee on the requirements for fiduciaries when eliminating a plan investment.… More

protected content Mixed Results from Courts of Appeals on ERISA Preemption

In recent weeks, U.S. Courts of Appeals have provided mixed results when determining whether state laws were superseded (i.e., preempted) by ERISA. Several Circuit Courts of Appeals recently held that a number of state laws that impacted ERISA plans were not preempted by ERISA, while some courts held that other state laws were not. … More

ERIC Files Amicus Brief in U.S. Supreme Court on Retiree Health Vesting Case

Please find below a link to an amicus brief filed today with the U.S. Supreme Court by ERIC and ABC in the M & G Polymers v. Tackett case. The brief was prepared jointly by Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Proskauer Rose LLP. … More

protected content High Stakes Drama at the ACA Corral

Today saw the publication of not ONE but TWO circuit court cases opining on the legality of granting tax subsidies to individuals who purchase health insurance through federally operated Exchanges as opposed to Exchanges operated by the states. … More

ERIC and Epstein Becker Green Release Summer 2014 Edition of Benefits Litigation Update

Attached please find the latest edition of the Benefits Litigation Update, a joint project of ERIC and the law firm of Epstein Becker Green. In this Benefits Litigation Update, we are focusing on … More

protected content SCOTUS Delivers This June’s Verdict on the ACA … and Contraceptives

Today the Supreme Court of the United States, in its last decision of the term, found that the HHS regulations imposing the “no-cost contraceptives” requirement of the Affordable Care Act violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 with respect to three for-profit, closely-held corporations. … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Decides Stock Drop Case (Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer)

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion today in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer, which involved whether the “presumption of prudence” applies at the pleading stage in stock drop cases. ERIC had jointly filed an amicus brief in this case, urging the Supreme Court to apply the presumption of prudence at the pleading stage.… More

ERIC President Scott Macey Comments on the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer

ERIC President Scott Macey reacts to today’s ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer: “Although we are disappointed that the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the ‘presumption of prudence’, we are pleased that the Court clarified the manner in which fiduciaries can defend themselves from meritless lawsuits.” … More

protected content Supreme Court Decides Non-ERISA Stock Case

Although we are still awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer (with respect to which ERIC filed an amicus brief), the Supreme Court has issued a non-ERISA stock case that may have an impact on ERISA stock cases. … More

protected content ERIC Files Amicus Brief in Cottillion v. United Refining Company

ERIC, along with several other trade associations, earlier today filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Cottillion v. United Refining Company. The brief was prepared by Jenner & Block LLP.… More

Covington & Burling Reviews 9th Circuit Ruling Concerning Erroneous Pension Benefit Payments

Seth Safra of Covington & Burling recently reviewed a June 6 split decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit finding that a pension plan participant who received erroneous benefit payments is not entitled to equitable relief in the form of surcharge, estoppel or reformation (Gabriel v. Alaska Electrical Pension Fund). … More

protected content ERIC’s Members Hear from Industry Experts at Legal Committee Meeting

In a meeting held May 8 in Washington, DC, members of ERIC’s Legal Committee heard from experts from the law firms of Miller &… More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Retiree Health Case

The U.S. Supreme Court has announced that it will hear the case of M&G Polymers USA, LLC v. Tackett, which involves when retiree health benefits are considered to be vested. … More

protected content Courts Continue to Decide Stock Drop Cases While Waiting for the Supreme Court to Act

As we await the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer, the lower courts continue to apply the presumption of prudence (known as the Moench presumption) in stock drop cases. … More

protected content Additional Developments in “Excessive” Fee Cases

The subject of 401(k) fees continues to be litigated and is attracting the interest of both the press and possibly the Supreme Court. In response to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Tussey v. ABB, … More

protected content Treasury and IRS Release Windsor Decision Guidance on Retirement Plans

Today, the Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service released Notice 2014-19, which provides guidance on the application of the decision in U.S. v Windsor on the federal tax treatment of same-sex married couples to retirement plans.… More

protected content Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Stock Drop Case

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer yesterday. ERIC had filed an amicus brief in the case urging the Court to uphold the presumption of prudence (as recognized by most courts of appeal that have ruled on the issue) regarding employer shares fund and ESOPs. … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on ACA Contraception Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments recently, in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood v. Sebelius, with respect to the contraception coverage mandated by the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”).… More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Issues Adverse Decision in U.S. v. Quality Stores

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision today in U.S. v. Quality Stores, Inc. The case involved whether severance payments made because of involuntary separation from employment are considered “wages” and therefore subject to the FICA payroll tax. … More

protected content Eighth Circuit Finds Fiduciaries Failed to Control Plan Expenses

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Tussey v. ABB provided mixed results for plan sponsors. The 8th Circuit agreed with several other Courts of Appeals that the deference provided for fiduciaries’ decisions (when based on appropriate plan language) is not limited to benefit claims. … More

protected content Second Federal Court Rules against Challenge to Premium Subsidies on Federal Exchanges

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on February 18 dismissed a complaint challenging the validity of an Internal Revenue Service rule providing premium assistance subsidies to individuals who purchase health insurance through federally facilitated exchanges in addition to state-run exchanges (King v. Sebelius). … More

protected content Osberg v. Foot Locker Remanded by Second Circuit

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on February 13 issued a decision in Osberg v. Foot Locker, remanding the case to the district court to determine whether the plaintiffs have shown they are entitled to plan reformation. … More

protected content ERIC and Epstein Becker Green Release Winter 2014 Edition of Benefits Litigation Update

Reminder:  We will be holding a FocusOn Call on Wednesday, January 29, from 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m. (EST) to discuss the cases addressed… More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in U.S. v. Quality Stores

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week on U.S. v. Quality Stores, Inc. The case involves whether severance payments made because of involuntary separation from employment are considered “wages” and therefore subject to the FICA payroll tax. … More

protected content Supreme Court Justice Temporarily Halts Enforcement of Contraceptive Mandate Against Nuns

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor on December 31 issued an order temporarily blocking enforcement of the contraceptive mandate against a nonprofit religious group, ordering the federal government to respond by January 3 (Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged v. Sebelius). … More

protected content Second Circuit Holds that Plan Administrator’s Interpretation of Plan Was Unreasonable

In yet another development in Frommert v. Conkright, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the plan administrator’s interpretation of the plan document was not reasonable, despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s prior ruling in the case that deference must be provided to the plan administrator’s interpretation.… More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Hear ERISA Case Involving Determination of Class

The U.S. Supreme Court recently announced that it will not decide whether the class was appropriately determined in Lockheed Martin v. Abbott.… More

ERIC Urges Supreme Court to Confirm that FICA Taxes Do Not Apply to Supplemental Unemployment Benefits

The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) on December 13 filed with the U.S. Supreme Court an amicus brief in the United States v. Quality Stores case, urging the Court to uphold an appeals court ruling that supplemental unemployment benefits … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court to Hear 401(k) ESOP Presumption of Prudence Case; ERIC Considering Filing Brief

The U.S. Supreme Court on December 13 agreed to hear another ERISA case in Dudenhoeffer v. Fifth Third Bancorp, involving whether the presumption of prudence typically available in stock drop cases should apply at the pleading stage of the lawsuit. … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Rules that Plan Terms Govern Statute of Limitations

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today in Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life that a plan can specify a statute of limitations period as long as the period is reasonably long and it does not conflict with any controlling statute. … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Two ACA Contraceptive Mandate Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court earlier today announced that it will hear challenges to the requirement that employers must provide contraceptive coverage as part of the preventive services mandate under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The Court agreed to hear Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. and Conestoga Wood Specialties v. Sebelius.… More

protected content

Ninth Circuit Rules that SEC Filings Incorporated into 401(k) SPDs Constitute Fiduciary Communications

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on October 23 ruled that statements furnished in Securities and Exchange Commission filings and incorporated by reference in a company’s section 401(k) summary plan descriptions (SPDs) are fiduciary activities… More

protected content Another Threat to the Viability of the ACA Exchanges

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on October 22 allowed a case to proceed that has the potential to deal a potentially life-threatening blow to the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The case (Halbig v. Sebelius, D.D.C., No. 13-623), along with a similar case in an Oklahoma federal district court (Pruitt v. Sebelius, E.D. Okla, Case No. CIV-11-30-RAW), addresses the ability of an Exchange to offer premium credits and cost-sharing subsidies to enrolled individuals. … More

protected content Supreme Court Hears ERISA Statute of Limitations Case Concerning Benefit Claim

The U.S. Supreme Court on October 15 heard oral arguments on a case concerning when a statute of limitations should accrue for judicial review of an adverse benefit determination under ERISA (Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co.). … More

protected content ERIC and Epstein Becker Green Release Fall 2013 Edition of Benefits Litigation Update

We have released the latest edition of the Benefits Litigation Update, a joint project of ERIC and the law firm of Epstein Becker Green. … More

protected content

ERIC Legal Committee: Recent Cases Involving Class Actions and Deadlines for Suing Over Benefit Claims

Although summer is rapidly coming to a close, the courts have been busy with employee benefits cases. Debra Davis and I wanted to briefly highlight two of these cases for you, which involve what participants can be included in a class action lawsuit and how long participants are given to sue when their claims for benefits are denied.… More

protected content Federal Court Awards Spousal Death Benefits to Same-Sex Spouse in Wake of DOMA Ruling

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in June that section three of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional with respect to the federal government’s ban on recognizing same sex marriages, a federal district court recently ruled that the same-sex spouse of a deceased profit-sharing plan participant is entitled to spousal death benefits under the terms of the plan and ERISA. … More

protected content

Ohio District Court Ruling Hints at Challenges to Come Regarding State Laws Banning Same-Sex Marriages

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio on July 23 granted a temporary restraining order banning enforcement of Ohio’s ban on recognizing same-sex marriages performed in another state, Maryland (Obergefell et al v. Kasich et al). … More

protected content Update on the DOMA Task Force

Yesterday we concluded the last of the scheduled ERIC conference calls on DOMA. This included an initial comprehensive look at the Supreme Court’s decision on DOMA two days after release, followed by three conference calls of ERIC’s DOMA Task Force. … More

protected content Fourth Circuit Upholds ACA Employer Mandate under Commerce Clause

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on July 11 ruled that the employer mandate under the Affordable Care Act is a valid exercise of Congress’ power to regulate commerce under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause. … More

protected content Coverage on U.S. Supreme Court Rulings on DOMA and Proposition 8

As you probably have heard, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 26 issued its long-awaited decisions on the constitutionality of same-sex marriages, ruling that section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause in the United States v. Windsor. … More

protected content Supreme Court Invalidates DOMA and Dismisses California Proposition 8 Appeal

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued its long-awaited decisions on the constitutionality of same-sex marriages. The Court’s holdings in these cases could have a significant impact on the manner in which employee benefit plans need to be operated. The Court heard two cases involving same-sex marriages – one involving state law and the other involving federal law.… More

ERIC President Scott Macey Comments on the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decisions on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and Proposition 8

Washington, D.C. -- ERIC President Scott Macey Comments on the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decisions on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and Proposition 8: “Today’s rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court could have a significant impact on the way employee benefit plans are administered. Companies will need to carefully evaluate their plans in light of these decisions. … More

protected content Verizon Lawsuit in De-Risking Case is Dismissed

The judge dismissed a class action against Verizon Communications challenging its decision to execute a “de-risking” transaction which transferred 41,000 retirees from its pension plan to Prudential Insurance Company of America. … More

protected content Supreme Court Rules that Plan Terms Govern in U.S. Airways v. McCutchen

The U.S. Supreme Court (in an opinion by Justice Elena Kagan) just ruled in U.S. Airways v. McCutchen that a plan is entitled to reimbursement pursuant to the plan’s terms.… More

ERIC Welcomes U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in ERISA Equitable Remedies Case

ERIC applauds a ruling issued earlier today by the U.S. Supreme Court holding that equitable rules cannot override the clear terms of a plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The case is U.S. Airways, Inc. v. McCutchen.… More

protected content Court Finds Fiduciaries Liable in Fee Litigation Case

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently found that fiduciaries violated their duties by failing to prudently select and monitor the… More

protected content

Sixth Circuit Appeals Court Finds PPACA Constitutional

On June 29, the first Circuit Court to decide the constitutionality of the individual mandate provision of the Patient Protection and… More

U.S. Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Xerox on Deferential Standard of Review

The United States Supreme Court earlier today (April 21) in Conkright v. Frommert reversed a Second Circuit Court of appeals decision and… More

More Court Rulings

Judicial Documents

protected content Supreme Court Holds for Companies and Statements of Opinions/Corporate Filings

The Supreme Court recently ruled in support companies and statements in its corporate filings by holding that public companies are not liable for statements of opinions that turn out to be false. … More

protected content Cert Request in RJR Pension Investment Committee v. Tatum

The Supreme Court has asked for the solicitor general to weigh in regarding whether it should grant cert to a case that would decide who bears the burden of proving a breach of fiduciary duty caused financial losses to a pension plan. … More

protected content Oral Arguments in King v. Burwell:  They Came, They Spoke, They Sat Down Again

Oral arguments in King v. Burwell were heard on Wednesday, and few pundits have failed to render an opinion. To me, the bottom line is… More

protected content Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Tibble v. Edison International

The U.S. Supreme Court on February 24 heard oral arguments in Tibble v. Edison International involving whether a claim that fiduciaries breached their duty of prudence by offering higher-cost retail-class mutual funds to participants instead of institution-class mutual funds … More

protected content SCOTUS Declines to Take on Windstream Case, Permitting Reduction of Retiree Health Benefits

The U.S. Supreme Court on February 23 declined to rehear a decision from the 8th Circuit Court that basically left standing an action by Windstream Corporation to significantly reduce retiree health benefits … More

protected content Second Circuit Rules for Plaintiffs in Amara v. Cigna

Earlier today the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the district court’s finding of plan reformation in Amara v. Cigna Corp.… More

Second Circuit Ruling in Amara v. CIGNA Corp.

Amara v. CIGNA Corp. … More

protected content Solicitor General Invited to File Brief in ERISA Preemption Case

The U.S. Supreme Court has invited the Solicitor General to file a brief to advise the Court whether to accept cert in the case of Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company. … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Retiree Health Case

The U.S. Supreme Court recently heard oral arguments in the case of M&G Polymers USA, LLC v. Tackett, which involves when retiree health benefits are considered to be vested. … More

protected content Supreme Court Declines Review of Fiduciary Breach Claims in Tussey v. ABB

The U.S. Supreme Court recently announced that it will not hear the case of Tussey v. ABB, despite encouragement from the Solicitor of Labor to hear the case. The Tussey case involved whether deference should be limited to fiduciaries’ decisions that relate to benefit claims. … More

protected content

District Court Denies EEOC’s Request for Temporary Restraining Order and Injunction against Company Wellness Program

Today, the judge in the U.S. District Court in Minnesota denied EEOC’s request for a TRO/PI, finding that the Honeywell wellness program inflicted no “irreparable harm”. … More

protected content EEOC Once Again Goes after Employer Wellness Plan; Files for Temporary Restraining Order

Yesterday the EEOC filed for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and an Expedited Preliminary Injunction in the U.S. District Court of Minnesota, claiming that Honeywell’s wellness program violates both the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA). … More

protected content Sixth Circuit Allows Plan to Restrict Where Lawsuits Can Be Filed

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that a plan document can limit where participants can file suit. In Smith v. Aegon Companies Pension Plan, the participant retired in 2000 and began to receive benefits… More

protected content Court Approves Class Action and Reinstates Claim in Osberg v. Foot Locker

We wanted to update ERIC members on the latest developments in the Osberg v. Foot Locker case (in which ERIC previously filed an amicus brief on behalf of members with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals). … More

protected content Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Case on Monitoring Plan Investments

The U.S. Supreme Court has indicated that it will hear the case of Tibble v. Edison International, which involves the selection and monitoring of plan investments and the amount of fees related to those investments.… More

protected content

Oklahoma District Court Finds Individuals in Federal Exchanges Ineligible for Subsidized Coverage under ACA

The federal district court in Oklahoma today decided to vacate the IRS regulation under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) that permits individuals in states with federal Exchanges to receive subsidized health insurance. … More

protected content Ninth Circuit Considers All Relevant Factors When Reviewing Fiduciary Decisions

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently examined the standard that applies when courts review a fiduciary’s benefit denial. The Court held that courts should consider “all of the relevant circumstances,” rather than upholding an administrator’s decision as long as it was reasonable.… More

protected content D.C. Circuit Court Agrees to Rehear ACA Case Involving Tax Subsidies

The full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia announced September 4 that it will rehear the case involving whether tax subsidies are available for both the state-based and federally-run exchanges (Halbig v. Burwell).… More

protected content SOL Recommends That Supreme Court Decide Fiduciary Duty Case

The Solicitor of Labor recently recommended that the U.S. Supreme Court consider to what extent fiduciaries are required to monitor investments on an ongoing basis in Tibble v. Edison International. In the Tibble case, the participants alleged that the plan fiduciaries improperly included retail-class mutual funds as investment options and violated the plan’s terms by allowing revenue sharing. … More

protected content Fourth Circuit Examines Fiduciary Duties

The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled in Tatum v. RJR Pension Investment Committee on the requirements for fiduciaries when eliminating a plan investment.… More

protected content Mixed Results from Courts of Appeals on ERISA Preemption

In recent weeks, U.S. Courts of Appeals have provided mixed results when determining whether state laws were superseded (i.e., preempted) by ERISA. Several Circuit Courts of Appeals recently held that a number of state laws that impacted ERISA plans were not preempted by ERISA, while some courts held that other state laws were not. … More

ERIC Files Amicus Brief in U.S. Supreme Court on Retiree Health Vesting Case

Please find below a link to an amicus brief filed today with the U.S. Supreme Court by ERIC and ABC in the M & G Polymers v. Tackett case. The brief was prepared jointly by Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Proskauer Rose LLP. … More

protected content High Stakes Drama at the ACA Corral

Today saw the publication of not ONE but TWO circuit court cases opining on the legality of granting tax subsidies to individuals who purchase health insurance through federally operated Exchanges as opposed to Exchanges operated by the states. … More

ERIC and Epstein Becker Green Release Summer 2014 Edition of Benefits Litigation Update

Attached please find the latest edition of the Benefits Litigation Update, a joint project of ERIC and the law firm of Epstein Becker Green. In this Benefits Litigation Update, we are focusing on … More

protected content SCOTUS Delivers This June’s Verdict on the ACA … and Contraceptives

Today the Supreme Court of the United States, in its last decision of the term, found that the HHS regulations imposing the “no-cost contraceptives” requirement of the Affordable Care Act violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 with respect to three for-profit, closely-held corporations. … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Decides Stock Drop Case (Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer)

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion today in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer, which involved whether the “presumption of prudence” applies at the pleading stage in stock drop cases. ERIC had jointly filed an amicus brief in this case, urging the Supreme Court to apply the presumption of prudence at the pleading stage.… More

protected content Supreme Court Decides Non-ERISA Stock Case

Although we are still awaiting the Supreme Court’s decision in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer (with respect to which ERIC filed an amicus brief), the Supreme Court has issued a non-ERISA stock case that may have an impact on ERISA stock cases. … More

ERIC Urges Appeals Court to Overturn District Court’s Misapplication of Fiduciary Deference under ERISA Plan

The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) on June 18 filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit urging the court to overturn an earlier district court ruling that misapplied judicial precedent regarding the deference owed to a plan administrator’s reasonable interpretation of plan terms under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The case is Cottillion v. United Refining Company.… More

protected content ERIC Files Amicus Brief in Cottillion v. United Refining Company

ERIC, along with several other trade associations, earlier today filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Cottillion v. United Refining Company. The brief was prepared by Jenner & Block LLP.… More

Covington & Burling Reviews 9th Circuit Ruling Concerning Erroneous Pension Benefit Payments

Seth Safra of Covington & Burling recently reviewed a June 6 split decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit finding that a pension plan participant who received erroneous benefit payments is not entitled to equitable relief in the form of surcharge, estoppel or reformation (Gabriel v. Alaska Electrical Pension Fund). … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Retiree Health Case

The U.S. Supreme Court has announced that it will hear the case of M&G Polymers USA, LLC v. Tackett, which involves when retiree health benefits are considered to be vested. … More

protected content Courts Continue to Decide Stock Drop Cases While Waiting for the Supreme Court to Act

As we await the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer, the lower courts continue to apply the presumption of prudence (known as the Moench presumption) in stock drop cases. … More

protected content Additional Developments in “Excessive” Fee Cases

The subject of 401(k) fees continues to be litigated and is attracting the interest of both the press and possibly the Supreme Court. In response to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Tussey v. ABB, … More

protected content Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Stock Drop Case

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer yesterday. ERIC had filed an amicus brief in the case urging the Court to uphold the presumption of prudence (as recognized by most courts of appeal that have ruled on the issue) regarding employer shares fund and ESOPs. … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments on ACA Contraception Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments recently, in Sebelius v. Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood v. Sebelius, with respect to the contraception coverage mandated by the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”).… More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Issues Adverse Decision in U.S. v. Quality Stores

The U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision today in U.S. v. Quality Stores, Inc. The case involved whether severance payments made because of involuntary separation from employment are considered “wages” and therefore subject to the FICA payroll tax. … More

protected content Eighth Circuit Finds Fiduciaries Failed to Control Plan Expenses

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision in Tussey v. ABB provided mixed results for plan sponsors. The 8th Circuit agreed with several other Courts of Appeals that the deference provided for fiduciaries’ decisions (when based on appropriate plan language) is not limited to benefit claims. … More

protected content Second Federal Court Rules against Challenge to Premium Subsidies on Federal Exchanges

The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on February 18 dismissed a complaint challenging the validity of an Internal Revenue Service rule providing premium assistance subsidies to individuals who purchase health insurance through federally facilitated exchanges in addition to state-run exchanges (King v. Sebelius). … More

protected content Osberg v. Foot Locker Remanded by Second Circuit

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on February 13 issued a decision in Osberg v. Foot Locker, remanding the case to the district court to determine whether the plaintiffs have shown they are entitled to plan reformation. … More

protected content ERIC Files Amicus Brief with Supreme Court in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer

ERIC filed (with other trade associations) an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday in the Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer case. We urged the Court to apply the presumption of prudence at the pleading stage of a lawsuit. … More

ERIC Urges Supreme Court to Apply Presumption of Prudence in Plans with Company Stock

The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) on February 3 filed (with other trade associations) with the U.S. Supreme Court an amicus brief in the Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer case, urging the Court to apply the presumption of prudence at the pleading stage of a lawsuit. … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in U.S. v. Quality Stores

The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments this week on U.S. v. Quality Stores, Inc. The case involves whether severance payments made because of involuntary separation from employment are considered “wages” and therefore subject to the FICA payroll tax. … More

protected content Supreme Court Justice Temporarily Halts Enforcement of Contraceptive Mandate Against Nuns

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor on December 31 issued an order temporarily blocking enforcement of the contraceptive mandate against a nonprofit religious group, ordering the federal government to respond by January 3 (Little Sisters of the Poor Home for the Aged v. Sebelius). … More

protected content Second Circuit Holds that Plan Administrator’s Interpretation of Plan Was Unreasonable

In yet another development in Frommert v. Conkright, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that the plan administrator’s interpretation of the plan document was not reasonable, despite the U.S. Supreme Court’s prior ruling in the case that deference must be provided to the plan administrator’s interpretation.… More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Hear ERISA Case Involving Determination of Class

The U.S. Supreme Court recently announced that it will not decide whether the class was appropriately determined in Lockheed Martin v. Abbott.… More

ERIC Urges Supreme Court to Confirm that FICA Taxes Do Not Apply to Supplemental Unemployment Benefits

The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) on December 13 filed with the U.S. Supreme Court an amicus brief in the United States v. Quality Stores case, urging the Court to uphold an appeals court ruling that supplemental unemployment benefits … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court to Hear 401(k) ESOP Presumption of Prudence Case; ERIC Considering Filing Brief

The U.S. Supreme Court on December 13 agreed to hear another ERISA case in Dudenhoeffer v. Fifth Third Bancorp, involving whether the presumption of prudence typically available in stock drop cases should apply at the pleading stage of the lawsuit. … More

protected content U.S. Supreme Court Rules that Plan Terms Govern Statute of Limitations

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled today in Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life that a plan can specify a statute of limitations period as long as the period is reasonably long and it does not conflict with any controlling statute. … More

protected content

Ninth Circuit Rules that SEC Filings Incorporated into 401(k) SPDs Constitute Fiduciary Communications

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on October 23 ruled that statements furnished in Securities and Exchange Commission filings and incorporated by reference in a company’s section 401(k) summary plan descriptions (SPDs) are fiduciary activities… More

protected content Another Threat to the Viability of the ACA Exchanges

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on October 22 allowed a case to proceed that has the potential to deal a potentially life-threatening blow to the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The case (Halbig v. Sebelius, D.D.C., No. 13-623), along with a similar case in an Oklahoma federal district court (Pruitt v. Sebelius, E.D. Okla, Case No. CIV-11-30-RAW), addresses the ability of an Exchange to offer premium credits and cost-sharing subsidies to enrolled individuals. … More

protected content Supreme Court Hears ERISA Statute of Limitations Case Concerning Benefit Claim

The U.S. Supreme Court on October 15 heard oral arguments on a case concerning when a statute of limitations should accrue for judicial review of an adverse benefit determination under ERISA (Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co.). … More

protected content

ERIC Legal Committee: Recent Cases Involving Class Actions and Deadlines for Suing Over Benefit Claims

Although summer is rapidly coming to a close, the courts have been busy with employee benefits cases. Debra Davis and I wanted to briefly highlight two of these cases for you, which involve what participants can be included in a class action lawsuit and how long participants are given to sue when their claims for benefits are denied.… More

protected content Federal Court Awards Spousal Death Benefits to Same-Sex Spouse in Wake of DOMA Ruling

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in June that section three of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is unconstitutional with respect to the federal government’s ban on recognizing same sex marriages, a federal district court recently ruled that the same-sex spouse of a deceased profit-sharing plan participant is entitled to spousal death benefits under the terms of the plan and ERISA. … More

protected content Fourth Circuit Upholds ACA Employer Mandate under Commerce Clause

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit on July 11 ruled that the employer mandate under the Affordable Care Act is a valid exercise of Congress’ power to regulate commerce under the Constitution’s Commerce Clause. … More

protected content Coverage on U.S. Supreme Court Rulings on DOMA and Proposition 8

As you probably have heard, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 26 issued its long-awaited decisions on the constitutionality of same-sex marriages, ruling that section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause in the United States v. Windsor. … More

protected content Supreme Court Invalidates DOMA and Dismisses California Proposition 8 Appeal

The U.S. Supreme Court has issued its long-awaited decisions on the constitutionality of same-sex marriages. The Court’s holdings in these cases could have a significant impact on the manner in which employee benefit plans need to be operated. The Court heard two cases involving same-sex marriages – one involving state law and the other involving federal law.… More

protected content Verizon Lawsuit in De-Risking Case is Dismissed

The judge dismissed a class action against Verizon Communications challenging its decision to execute a “de-risking” transaction which transferred 41,000 retirees from its pension plan to Prudential Insurance Company of America. … More

protected content Supreme Court Rules that Plan Terms Govern in U.S. Airways v. McCutchen

The U.S. Supreme Court (in an opinion by Justice Elena Kagan) just ruled in U.S. Airways v. McCutchen that a plan is entitled to reimbursement pursuant to the plan’s terms.… More

ERIC Welcomes U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in ERISA Equitable Remedies Case

ERIC applauds a ruling issued earlier today by the U.S. Supreme Court holding that equitable rules cannot override the clear terms of a plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The case is U.S. Airways, Inc. v. McCutchen.… More

protected content Court Finds Fiduciaries Liable in Fee Litigation Case

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently found that fiduciaries violated their duties by failing to prudently select and monitor the… More

protected content

Sixth Circuit Appeals Court Finds PPACA Constitutional

On June 29, the first Circuit Court to decide the constitutionality of the individual mandate provision of the Patient Protection and… More

U.S. Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Xerox on Deferential Standard of Review

The United States Supreme Court earlier today (April 21) in Conkright v. Frommert reversed a Second Circuit Court of appeals decision and… More

More Judicial Documents

Policy Briefs

protected content ERIC’s Members Hear from Industry Experts at Legal Committee Meeting

In a meeting held May 8 in Washington, DC, members of ERIC’s Legal Committee heard from experts from the law firms of Miller &… More

More Policy Briefs

Press Releases

Supreme Court Rules ERISA Preempts State Claims Reporting

We are pleased that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) preempts Vermont’s law to require the reporting of health claims paid by self-funded benefit plans. ERIC had argued the same point in an amicus brief filed in October 2015… More

King v Burwell Decision
Large Employers To Congress:
Now That The Supreme Court Has Issued Its Health Care Decision, Let’s Fix The Underlying Law

American business cannot operate without legal and regulatory stability. The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) today said the Supreme Court removed a source of potential uncertainty in its decision in the King v. Burwell health care case. But the group said much legislative work is needed to fix the underlying law.… More

ERIC Urges Sixth Circuit to Apply “Ordinary Principles of Contract Interpretation” Concerning Vesting of Retiree Health Benefits

The ERISA Industry Committee filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit urging the court to apply “ordinary principles of contract interpretation” involving vesting of retiree health benefits following the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in M&G Polymers USA, LLC v. Tackett. … More

ERIC Urges Supreme Court to Uphold Earlier Rulings Affirming ERISA’s Six-Year Statute of Limitations for Alleged Fiduciary Breach Claims

The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC), the leading trade association dedicated exclusively to the employee benefit and compensation interests of America’s largest companies, today filed with the U.S. Supreme Court an amicus brief in the Tibble v. Edison International case. … More

ERIC President Scott Macey Comments on the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer

ERIC President Scott Macey reacts to today’s ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer: “Although we are disappointed that the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the ‘presumption of prudence’, we are pleased that the Court clarified the manner in which fiduciaries can defend themselves from meritless lawsuits.” … More

ERIC Urges Appeals Court to Overturn District Court’s Misapplication of Fiduciary Deference under ERISA Plan

The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) on June 18 filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit urging the court to overturn an earlier district court ruling that misapplied judicial precedent regarding the deference owed to a plan administrator’s reasonable interpretation of plan terms under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The case is Cottillion v. United Refining Company.… More

ERIC President Scott Macey Comments on the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decisions on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and Proposition 8

Washington, D.C. -- ERIC President Scott Macey Comments on the U.S. Supreme Court’s Decisions on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and Proposition 8: “Today’s rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court could have a significant impact on the way employee benefit plans are administered. Companies will need to carefully evaluate their plans in light of these decisions. … More

ERIC Welcomes U.S. Supreme Court Ruling in ERISA Equitable Remedies Case

ERIC applauds a ruling issued earlier today by the U.S. Supreme Court holding that equitable rules cannot override the clear terms of a plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). The case is U.S. Airways, Inc. v. McCutchen.… More

More Press Releases

Regulatory Documents

protected content Treasury and IRS Release Windsor Decision Guidance on Retirement Plans

Today, the Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service released Notice 2014-19, which provides guidance on the application of the decision in U.S. v Windsor on the federal tax treatment of same-sex married couples to retirement plans.… More

protected content Treasury and IRS Issue Guidance on DOMA Issues (but NOT retroactive effect)

Today, the Treasury Department and Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) issued Revenue Ruling 2013-17, which provides guidance on the treatment of same-sex married couples for federal income tax purposes, including for some issues relating to retirement benefits. … More

More Regulatory Documents