The Supreme Court should not prevent 401(k) plan fiduciaries from being sued for more expensive investment choices made years earlier, petitioners argued in a brief filed Tuesday in Tibble et al. vs. Edison International et al.
The Supreme Court agreed Oct. 2 to review the case to settle lower court splits on how to interpret the Employee Retirement Income Security Act’s statute of limitations on fiduciary-breach lawsuits. Among other things, the plaintiffs’ lawyers argued in the brief, time-barring such actions “deprives new beneficiaries of protection against long-standing imprudent investments.” The plaintiffs’ lead attorney is Jerome J. Schlichter, managing partner of law firm Schlichter Bogard & Denton.
A separate class-action lawsuit brought by employees of Lockheed Martin Corp., Bethesda, Md., has been scheduled for trial on Dec. 15 in U.S. District Court in East St. Louis, Ill. The lawsuit, filed in September 2006 and remanded twice, now represents more than 100,000 employees and retirees questioning the fees and investments of two Lockheed Martin 401(k) plans, including a stable value fund and company stock, which the plaintiffs allege were imprudent investments. The class, represented by Mr. Schlichter, was approved in August by U.S. District Judge Michael Reagan.