Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation Blog

The View from Proskauer on Developments in the World of Employee Benefits, Executive Compensation & ERISA Litigation

Category Archives: Standing

Subscribe to Standing RSS Feed

District Court Partially Dismisses ERISA 401(k) Fee and Performance Claims for Lack of Standing

A federal district court in New York recently granted Omnicom Group Inc.’s (“Omnicom’s”) motion to dismiss, for lack of Article III standing, claims challenging the offering of investment options in Omnicom’s 401(k) plan in which the plaintiff participants did not invest.  The court denied Omnicom’s motion to dismiss, however, with respect to the remainder of … Continue Reading

U.S. Supreme Court Holds ERISA Defined Benefit Plan Participants Without Monetary Losses Lack Article III Standing to Assert Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claims

Earlier today, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed a decision by the Eighth Circuit holding that ERISA plan participants lack Article III standing to sue for breach of fiduciary duty to recover investment losses in a defined benefit fund that was not underfunded.  The Court concluded that the participants lacked a concrete stake in the dispute … Continue Reading

401(k) Plan Participant Cannot Pursue Claims on Behalf of Plans in Which She Did Not Participate

A federal district court in Ohio concluded that a 401(k) plan participant could assert fiduciary breach and prohibited transaction claims only on behalf of the plan in which she participated, and not on behalf of other plans.  In this case, the plaintiff was a participant in Andrus Wagstaff, PC’s 401(k) plan, and she alleged that … Continue Reading

SDNY Rejects Class Standing and Fiduciary Breach Claims In Connection With Alleged Double-Charging Scheme

A New York federal district court concluded that a defined benefit plan participant lacked standing to seek relief on behalf of plans other than the one in which he was a participant. In this case, plaintiff claimed that defendants breached ERISA fiduciary duties and engaged in prohibited transactions by charging undisclosed markups for securities trades. … Continue Reading

Sixth Circuit Holds Pecuniary Loss Not Required to Establish Standing In Benefit Claim

The Sixth Circuit joined several other circuits in holding that a participant need not have actually incurred a financial loss in order to have standing to assert an ERISA claim for benefits under Section 502(a)(1)(B).  Here, the plan participant arranged an air ambulance for his son in a non-emergent situation, but the plan refused to pay … Continue Reading

Third Circuit Analyzes Standing for ERISA Plan Management Claims

A recent Third Circuit decision reinforced the need for ERISA plaintiffs to plead injury-in-fact to establish Article III standing.  In Krauter v. Siemens Corp., No. 17-1662, 2018 WL 921542 (3d Cir. Feb. 16, 2018), the plaintiff was a beneficiary of four pension plans that had been sponsored by Siemens.  After the Plaintiff’s retirement, Siemens sold … Continue Reading

No Standing To Pursue Fiduciary-Breach Claim Where Plan Became Overfunded During Litigation

The Eighth Circuit held that defined benefit pension plan participants who alleged breach of fiduciary duty and prohibited transaction claims under ERISA lacked standing to assert their claims because, during the course of the litigation, the plan became overfunded. Plaintiffs brought suit after the plan lost $1.1 billion, which plaintiffs claimed arose from imprudent investments and … Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit: Medical Providers Lack ERISA Standing

The Ninth Circuit affirmed two district court decisions that concluded medical providers were not “beneficiaries” under Section 502(a) of ERISA and therefore lacked standing to bring an ERISA claim. The Court explained that, in one case, the provider had an assignment from the participants, but the assignment was invalid because the plan contained a non-assignment clause … Continue Reading

Anti-Assignment Provision Bars Surgery Center’s $3.3 Million ERISA Benefits Claims

A federal district court in California held that the ILWU-PMA Welfare Benefit Plan’s anti-assignment provision barred Brand Tarzana Surgical Institute’s claim for benefits and thus dismissed the Institute’s claim for benefits.  In so holding, the court rejected the Institute’s argument that the plan waived the right to assert the anti-assignment provision as a defense by … Continue Reading

Defined Benefit Plan Participant’s Action Mooted by ERISA Plan’s Improved Financial Condition

A federal district court in Minnesota dismissed a plan participant’s allegations that plan fiduciaries mismanaged a defined benefit plan — and thus caused it to be underfunded — because the plan’s financial condition improved during the course of the litigation.  As reported here, the court previously held that these allegations were sufficient to establish that … Continue Reading

Sub-Assignee Has Standing To Assert ERISA Claims

The Eleventh Circuit held that a sub-assignee’s claim for payment of a chiropractor’s bills against Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida were within the scope of ERISA and thus determined that the district court properly declined to remand the case to state court. … Continue Reading

Fifth Circuit: Hospital Enjoys Standing to Seek ERISA Benefits

The Fifth Circuit ruled that an out-of-network medical provider that was assigned a patient’s rights to health insurance benefits has standing to sue a health plan that underpays its portion of the benefits due even if the plan participant portion is paid in full.  North Cypress Medical Ctr. Operating Co., et al. v. Cigna Healthcare, … Continue Reading

Same-Sex Spouse Has No Standing to Assert COBRA Notice Claim

A New Jersey federal district court held (in an unpublished opinion) that a former plan participant’s same-sex spouse who never enrolled in the benefit plan did not have standing to assert a claim alleging that his spouse’s employer failed to provide proper and timely notice of coverage under COBRA.… Continue Reading

Defined Benefit Plan Participants Have Standing to Pursue Fiduciary Breach Claims

A federal district court in Minnesota found that participants in a defined benefit pension plan had standing to assert claims that defendants breached their fiduciary duties by, among other things, shifting to an equities-only investment strategy that resulted in the plan becoming significantly underfunded and thereby increasing the risk of default. … Continue Reading

Valid Assignment Confers Beneficiary Status on Chiropractor

A federal district court in Illinois recently issued a pair of rulings in cases where insurers sought to recoup payments from practitioners.  Pennsylvania Chiropractic Association v. Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159331 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 7, 2013); 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159491 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 7, 2013).  Plaintiffs, three individual chiropractors … Continue Reading

Chiropractors Lack Standing Under ERISA to Assert Claims For Benefits

A federal district court in New Jersey recently dismissed claims asserted by a putative class of chiropractors seeking to enjoin the procedure used by UnitedHealth to determine the necessity of certain treatments administered by in-network physicians, finding that they lacked standing to assert their claims.  Premier Health Ctr., P.C. v. UnitedHealth Grp., No. 2:11-cv-00425-ES-CLW (D.N.J. … Continue Reading

Third Circuit Rules Statute of Limitations Accrues Upon Receipt of Notice of Distribution From IRS

In Raymond v. Callebaut, 2013 WL 150232 (3d Cir. Jan. 15, 2013) (summary order), the Third Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling that dismissed plaintiff’s claim seeking benefits due under the terms of a 401(k) plan because plaintiff’s claim was filed more than fourteen years after it had accrued. Plaintiff’s claim was based on an … Continue Reading

Fourth Circuit Concludes Participants Have No Constitutional Standing to Assert Prohibited Transaction Claims

In David v. Alphin, 2013 WL 142072 (4th Cir. 2013), plaintiffs alleged that defendants engaged in prohibited transactions and breached their fiduciary duties by selecting and maintaining Bank-affiliated mutual funds in the investment menu for the Bank’s 401(k) Plan and the Bank’s separate defined benefit pension plan. The Fourth Circuit affirmed dismissal of plaintiffs’ claims. … Continue Reading

Second Circuit Dismisses Stock-Drop Claim Based on Moench Presumption of Prudence

In Slaymon v. SLM Corp., 2012 WL 6684564 (2d Cir. Dec. 26, 2012), the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal of an employer-stock class action in a summary order. Plaintiffs were employees of SLM Corp. (also known as Sallie Mae) who alleged that the fiduciaries of two Sallie Mae retirement plans breached fiduciary duties … Continue Reading
LexBlog

This website uses third party cookies, over which we have no control. To deactivate the use of third party advertising cookies, you should alter the settings in your browser.

OK