Photo of Russell Hirschhorn

Russell Hirschhorn

Subscribe to Russell Hirschhorn's Posts

"Russell has strong subject matter expertise."

"Russ is extremely responsive and practical. He listens to the client perspective and is hands on and engaged, while also delegating work as appropriate." 

-Chambers USA

Russell L. Hirschhorn is co-head of Proskauer’s premier ERISA Litigation Group, which is a significant component of the firm’s ERISA Practice Center and globally renowned Labor and Employment Law Department.  Russell’s practice focuses on employee benefits issues arising under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), including class action and complex litigation, U.S. Department of Labor and Internal Revenue Service investigations, and counseling clients on best practices to avoid litigation.

Russell has more than two decades of experience representing plan sponsors, fiduciaries, trustees, and service providers across the country.  His work on behalf of clients has included all types of plans, including 401(k) plans, 403(b) plans, defined benefit plans, employee stock ownership plans, executive compensation plans, health and welfare plans, multiemployer plans, multiple employer plans, and severance plans.  And, it has included the full gamut of claims arising under ERISA, including excessive investment and plan administration fees and investment underperformance claims; cash balance plan litigation; claims for benefits; company stock fund cases; claims for delinquent contributions; ERISA § 510 claims; ERISA statutory claims; ESOP litigation; executive compensation claims; independent contractor claims; independent fiduciary representations; multiemployer fund litigation; plan service provider claims; recoupment of plan overpayments; retiree benefits claims; severance plan claims; and withdrawal liability claims.

Deeply dedicated to pro bono work, Russell has been recognized on several occasions for his commitment to pro bono work including by President George W. Bush in receiving the U.S. President’s Volunteer Service Award.  His pro bono work has included serving as lead litigation counsel in several impact litigations: on behalf of social security recipients whose benefits were unlawfully suspended based on an outstanding warrant, deaf and hard of hearing prisoners in Louisiana prisons seeking disability accommodations, and Swartzentruber Amish in upstate New York to obtain religious exemptions from certain building code requirements. Russell also was a principal drafter of several amicus briefs for the Innocence Project, a legal non-profit committed to exonerating wrongly convicted people.

Contact:Read more about Russell Hirschhorn

A recent Ninth Circuit decision has generated considerable controversy amongst employee benefits practitioners by holding that plan fiduciaries engaged in prohibited transactions when they amended the plan’s existing recordkeeping contract to add brokerage and investment advisory services. In so ruling, the Court remanded the case to the district court to consider whether the transactions fell within the exemption for reasonable service agreements and, independently, whether it was imprudent for plan fiduciaries not to consider third-party compensation earned by the plan’s recordkeeper. The case is Bugielski v. AT&T Services, Inc., 76 F. 4th 894 (9th Cir. 2023).

Participants in AT&T’s 401(k) plan sued the plan administrator and the plan’s investment committee, alleging that defendants engaged in prohibited transactions and breached their duty of prudence by failing to investigate and evaluate all compensation earned by the plan’s longtime recordkeeper. The claims apparently were prompted by amendments to AT&T’s contract with its recordkeeper, which gave plan participants access to the recordkeeper’s brokerage account platform and to investment advisory services through a third-party advisor. Under these arrangements, the recordkeeper received revenue-sharing fees from the mutual funds available to participants via the brokerage account platform; and, through its own agreement with the investment advisor, the recordkeeper received a portion of the fees that the investment advisor earned from managing participant accounts.

In a case of first impression in the Tenth Circuit, the Court recently joined the chorus of circuit courts in holding that a 401(k) plan participant alleging excessive investment management or recordkeeping fees must assert a “meaningful benchmark” in order to survive a motion to dismiss.  In addition to rejecting commonly pleaded “benchmarks” because they were not meaningful, the Court’s ruling is of particular significance because, unlike some other courts, it dismissed the participants’ “share-class claim”—ruling on a motion to dismiss that their allegation that cheaper share classes of the same mutual fund were available to the plan was demonstrably false.  The case is Matney v. Barrick Gold, No. 22-4045, 2023 WL 5731996 (10th Cir. Sept. 6, 2023).

On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Seventh Circuit issued its opinion in Hughes v. Northwestern University, concluding that participants in two Northwestern 403(b) plans plausibly pled fiduciary-breach claims based on allegations of excessive recordkeeping and investment management fees, but dismissed their claim that too many investment options caused them “decision paralysis.”  In…

The filing of a new 401(k) plan “excessive fee” or “investment underperformance” complaint is hardly “news” these days given the proliferation of suits that have been filed over the past several years.  In fact, hardly a week goes by when at least one new lawsuit has not been commenced.  Still, plan sponsors and fiduciaries were…