Skip to main content
MENU
Subscribe
  • Sign Up Free
  • LOGIN
  • Subscribe
  • Topics
    • Alternatives
    • Artificial Intelligence
    • Consultants
    • Defined Contribution
    • ESG
    • ETFs
    • Face to Face
    • Hedge Funds
    • Industry Voices
    • Investing
    • Money Management
    • Partner Content
    • Pension Funds
    • Private Equity
    • Real Estate
    • Regulation
    • SECURE 2.0
    • Special Reports
    • Washington
    • White Papers
  • Rankings & Awards
    • 1,000 Largest Retirement Plans
    • Top-Performing Managers
    • Largest Money Managers
    • DC Money Managers
    • DC Record Keepers
    • Largest Hedge Fund Managers
    • World's Largest Retirement Funds
    • Best Places to Work in Money Management
    • Excellence & Innovation Awards
    • WPS Innovation Awards
    • Influential Women in Institutional Investing 2023
    • Eddy Awards
  • ETFs
    • Latest ETF News
    • Fund Screener
    • Education Center
    • Equities
    • Fixed Income
    • Commodities
    • Actively Managed
    • Alternatives
    • ESG Rated
  • ESG
    • Latest ESG News
    • The Institutional Investor’s Guide to ESG Investing
    • ESG Sustainability - Gaining Momentum
    • ESG Investing | Industry Brief
    • Innovation in ESG Investing
    • 2023 ESG Investing Conference
    • ESG Rated ETFs
    • Divestment Database
  • Defined Contribution
    • Latest DC News
    • The Plan Sponsor's Guide to Retirement Income
    • DC Money Manager Rankings
    • DC Record Keeper Rankings
    • Innovations in DC
    • DC Plan Design: Improving Participant Outcomes
    • 2023 Defined Contribution East Conference
  • Searches & Hires
    • Latest Searches & Hires News
    • Searches & Hires Database
    • RFPs
  • Research Center
    • The P&I Research Center
    • Earnings Tracker
    • Endowment Returns Tracker
    • Corporate Pension Contribution Tracker
    • Pension Fund Returns Tracker
    • Pension Risk Transfer Database
  • Careers
  • Events
    • View All Conferences
    • View All Webinars
  • Print
Breadcrumb
  1. Home
  2. COURTS
September 06, 2021 12:00 AM

All eyes watching DC ERISA case before high court

Industry hoping ruling will give lower courts guidance, clarity

Robert Steyer
  • Tweet
  • Share
  • Share
  • Email
  • More
    Kimberly Jones
    Kimberly Jones thinks it’ll be key if the court provides a standard for dismissal.

    The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a case that legal experts say could refine standards on how lower courts interpret ERISA complaints covering defined contribution sponsors' administrative and investment fees, investment lineups and overall plan management.

    The court's July 2 decision to hear oral arguments in the case of Hughes et al. vs. Northwestern University et al. is viewed by consultants, ERISA attorneys and interest groups as a chance to clarify guidance because federal District Courts and federal appeals courts have issued conflicting rulings on what constitutes sufficient grounds for a case to be dismissed or to go to trial.

    "The Supreme Court has the opportunity to play traffic cop," said Andrew Oringer, New York-based partner in the ERISA and executive compensation group at Dechert LLP.

    "People on both sides don't know what the rules are," said Mr. Oringer, who represents sponsor clients in ERISA cases. "There's no consensus in the lower courts. This is an opportunity for the Supreme Court to straighten things out."

    Related Articles
    Supreme Court agrees to hear ERISA case against Northwestern University
    Acting U.S. solicitor general weighs in on Northwestern ERISA case

    The key issue before the court is what is required for an ERISA complaint to get past a motion to dismiss. Judges must determine whether a complaint states a claim "upon which relief can be granted," according to federal rules of civil procedure. Unless a judge rules that a claim is plausible and, in ERISA cases, adequately alleges a breach of fiduciary duty, the judge will dismiss the case.

    For sponsors, getting a court to dismiss a case saves the time and expense of preparing for trial. For plaintiffs, getting a court to reject a dismissal motion allows them, through the legal discovery process, to gather information so they can further substantiate their allegations.

    "The potential impact is huge," said Kimberly Jones, a Chicago-based partner at Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP. "If the Supreme Court can clarify a standard for motion to dismiss, it would provide clarity for both sides." And clarity could reduce the number of cases proceeding to trial, said Ms. Jones, who represents defendants in ERISA cases.

    "The current level of ERISA litigation is unsustainable," said Joshua A. Lichtenstein, a New York-based partner and head of the ERISA fiduciary practice at Ropes & Gray LLP.

    "If there is an ability for cases to be dismissed early, it could have a big impact," said Mr. Lichtenstein, whose firm represents sponsors in ERISA cases. The conflicting lower court rulings "is having an impact on plan sponsor behavior."

    Bloomberg
    Courts disagree

    The source of uncertainty — and a reason the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case, though date for oral arguments has been set — is a "circuit split," conflicting rulings among federal appeals courts on cases with similar allegations.

    The court agreed to hear the Northwestern case because different appeals courts made different decisions on the trial-worthiness of alleged ERISA violations regarding excessive fees, poor-performing investment options, too many record keepers and/or inattentive management.

    In the Northwestern case, participants in two university 403(b) plans sued in 2016, but a U.S. District Court judge dismissed the case in May 2018. The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago upheld the decision in May 2020, saying there was "no error" in the judge's ruling.

    The participants petitioned the Supreme Court in August 2020, saying the 7th Circuit's decision clashed with rulings by two other federal appellate courts, which allowed cases to proceed involving similar complaints against other universities' 403(b) plans.

    In one of those cases, Jennifer Sweda et al. vs. Jack Heuer et al., the University of Pennsylvania announced in January 2021 that it would pay a $13 million settlement. Ms. Sweda is a participant in a university 403(b) plan; Mr. Heuer is vice president of human resources for the university.

    Current and former participants sued in 2016, alleging a series of ERISA violations in plan management. A U.S. District Court judge in Philadelphia dismissed the case in 2017. However, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia reversed the lower court's ruling on some allegations covering excessive administrative fees, failing to "comprehensively review" plan management, failing to use the plan's size to negotiate lower fees and keeping high-cost investment options when cheaper, better-performing investments were available.

    The university asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the appeals court's decision, but the request was denied in March 2020.

    In the other case, the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in St. Louis in May 2020 reversed part of a U.S. District Court judge's September 2018 ruling that dismissed the entire complaint in Davis et al. vs. Washington University in St. Louis et al.

    The appeals court said plaintiffs made a valid argument about excessive fees, but it upheld the dismissal of the allegation that the university's 403(b) plan kept too many poor-performing investments in its menu. The appeals court remanded the case to the lower court, where it remains pending.

    Getty Images
    Taking sides

    The Supreme Court has asked Northwestern University and the plaintiffs for additional information, and interest groups are likely to file amicus briefs in such a high-profile case.

    Some of the plaintiffs' allegations — about high record-keeping fees and retention of "imprudent" investments — are supported by the U.S. solicitor general's office, which submitted its opinion on May 25 while asking the court to address the matter.

    "The case presents an opportunity for this court to clarify that ERISA requires fiduciaries to work actively to limit a plan's expenses and remove imprudent investments, and that fiduciaries will not be excused from those responsibilities on the ground that they selected some (or even many) other prudent investments for a plan," wrote Acting Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar.

    Citing the disagreements among appeals courts, she added: "The question of what ERISA requires of plan fiduciaries to control expenses is important to millions of employees throughout the nation whose retirement assets are invested in ERISA-governed plans. And that question frequently recurs."

    Ms. Prelogar's comments highlighted a dispute among the courts that, she wrote, should have been resolved via May 2015 Supreme Court ruling in Tibble et al. vs Edison International Inc. et al. In that case about the statute of limitations for plaintiffs filing an ERISA complaint, the Supreme Court's unanimous pro-plaintiff ruling contained the requirement that fiduciaries have "a continuing duty to monitor trust investments and remove imprudent ones."

    However, in the Northwestern case, the 7th Circuit ruled that fiduciaries can offer a range of investment options and that participants make choices rather than be forced to accept unattractive options.

    This reasoning "was unsound," Ms. Prelogar wrote. "Fiduciaries are not excused from their obligations not to offer imprudent investments with unreasonably high fees on the ground that they offered other prudent investments."

    The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling "was really misguided," Dara Smith, Washington-based attorney for the AARP Foundation, said in an interview.

    "It conflicts with the duty to monitor," she said. "It falls squarely under Tibble. I don't think any greater clarity is necessary. It should be an easy question to answer."

    Related Article
    Court nixes ERISA complaints against Northwestern University
    Seeking specificity

    An opposing view by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and pro-defense ERISA attorneys is that the current pleading standards in some jurisdictions are so meager that plaintiffs can overcome a motion to dismiss by offering out-of-context comparisons.

    "We want specificity," said Chantel L. Sheaks, Washington-based vice president for retirement policy for the Chamber, which has filed amicus briefs for defendants in various Supreme Court and lower court cases supporting employers in ERISA cases.

    Specificity, she added, means that sponsors should be evaluated not only on the cost of their plans but also on the services provided.

    "Cheaper alone should not be enough to drag a company into court," she said.

    "There will always be something out there that's cheaper," she said, referring to plaintiffs' lawsuits comparing a sponsor's record-keeping and investment fees to others in the marketplace. "ERISA says you don't have to be the cheapest."

    A Supreme Court ruling could reinforce the fact that lower courts should evaluate sponsors' actions under ERISA based on how they developed their plans and investments rather than on short-term outcomes.

    "It can't be a test of results," said Douglas Hallward-Driemeier, the Washington-based chairman of the Ropes & Gray appellate and Supreme Court practice. "It has to be a test of the process."

    The clash of appeals court rulings has exasperated consultant Michael Barry so much that he is willing to accept guidance that doesn't favor his view that the pro-defense 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling was correct.

    "If we get a pro-plaintiff answer, that actually would be an improvement over what we have now," said Mr. Barry, president of O3 Plan Advisory Services LLC, a part of October Three Consulting in Chicago.

    "This all boils down to a vision of ERISA," he said. "One is that retirement investing is a closed insular world where people are held to a higher standard than anyone else." The other vision, which he supports, is that "the retirement investor shouldn't take a deal worse than the retail investor."

    Related Articles
    Litigation over Juniper's fees could drive more lawsuits
    Appeals court reinstates ERISA complaints in NYU case
    Judges don’t bite on DB defense applying to DC in ERISA cases
    Recommended for You
    gavel_scales_lawbook_1550-main_i.jpg
    Cape Cod Healthcare reeled into ERISA suit regarding 403(b) plan
    Northern Trust sign
    Northern Trust settles AutoZone 401(k) ERISA suit for $2.5 million
    gavel-money-fine-penalty_1550_i.jpg
    Insurance Services Office to pay $4 million ERISA suit settlement
    Pension Risk Transfer: Derisking Trends and Considerations
    Sponsored Content: Pension Risk Transfer: Derisking Trends and Considerations
    Sponsored
    White Papers
    What a Fed pivot and ‘higher for longer’ mean for emerging markets
    A Guide to Home Equity Investments: The Untapped Real Estate Asset Class
    How to Modernize a School District Retirement Plan
    Q4 2023 Credit Outlook: Price Is What You Pay, Value Is What You Get
    There's More Than One Way to Be a Climate Investor
    Exploring the Commercial Application of Artificial Intelligence
    View More
    Sponsored Content
    Partner Content
    The Industrialization of ESG Investment
    For institutional investors, ETFs can make meeting liquidity needs easier
    Gold: the most effective commodity investment
    2021 Investment Outlook | Investing Beyond the Pandemic: A Reset for Portfolios
    Ten ways retirement plan professionals add value to plan sponsors
    Gold: an efficient hedge
    View More
    E-MAIL NEWSLETTERS

    Sign up and get the best of News delivered straight to your email inbox, free of charge. Choose your news – we will deliver.

    Subscribe Today
    October 23, 2023 page one

    Get access to the news, research and analysis of events affecting the retirement and institutional money management businesses from a worldwide network of reporters and editors.

    Subscribe
    Connect With Us
    • RSS
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • LinkedIn

    Our Mission

    To consistently deliver news, research and analysis to the executives who manage the flow of funds in the institutional investment market.

    About Us

    Main Office
    685 Third Avenue
    Tenth Floor
    New York, NY 10017-4036

    Chicago Office
    130 E. Randolph St.
    Suite 3200
    Chicago, IL 60601

    Contact Us

    Careers at Crain

    About Pensions & Investments

     

    Advertising
    • Media Kit
    • P&I Custom Content
    • P&I Careers | Post a Job
    • Reprints & Permissions
    Resources
    • Subscribe
    • Newsletters
    • FAQ
    • P&I Research Center
    • Site map
    • Staff Directory
    Legal
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Request
    Pensions & Investments
    Copyright © 1996-2023. Crain Communications, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
    • Topics
      • Alternatives
      • Artificial Intelligence
      • Consultants
      • Defined Contribution
      • ESG
      • ETFs
      • Face to Face
      • Hedge Funds
      • Industry Voices
      • Investing
      • Money Management
      • Partner Content
      • Pension Funds
      • Private Equity
      • Real Estate
      • Regulation
      • SECURE 2.0
      • Special Reports
      • Washington
      • White Papers
    • Rankings & Awards
      • 1,000 Largest Retirement Plans
      • Top-Performing Managers
      • Largest Money Managers
      • DC Money Managers
      • DC Record Keepers
      • Largest Hedge Fund Managers
      • World's Largest Retirement Funds
      • Best Places to Work in Money Management
      • Excellence & Innovation Awards
      • WPS Innovation Awards
      • Influential Women in Institutional Investing 2023
      • Eddy Awards
    • ETFs
      • Latest ETF News
      • Fund Screener
      • Education Center
      • Equities
      • Fixed Income
      • Commodities
      • Actively Managed
      • Alternatives
      • ESG Rated
    • ESG
      • Latest ESG News
      • The Institutional Investor’s Guide to ESG Investing
      • ESG Sustainability - Gaining Momentum
      • ESG Investing | Industry Brief
      • Innovation in ESG Investing
      • 2023 ESG Investing Conference
      • ESG Rated ETFs
      • Divestment Database
    • Defined Contribution
      • Latest DC News
      • The Plan Sponsor's Guide to Retirement Income
      • DC Money Manager Rankings
      • DC Record Keeper Rankings
      • Innovations in DC
      • DC Plan Design: Improving Participant Outcomes
      • 2023 Defined Contribution East Conference
    • Searches & Hires
      • Latest Searches & Hires News
      • Searches & Hires Database
      • RFPs
    • Research Center
      • The P&I Research Center
      • Earnings Tracker
      • Endowment Returns Tracker
      • Corporate Pension Contribution Tracker
      • Pension Fund Returns Tracker
      • Pension Risk Transfer Database
    • Careers
    • Events
      • View All Conferences
      • View All Webinars
    • Print