Appellate Law

CA1: another ERISA standing case

By S. COTUS

Evans v. Akers, 07-1140 (7/18/08).  This is an ERISA case.  I will read it in more detail later.  But it comes down to this holding:

hold that former employees who allege that fiduciary breaches reduced their lump-sum distribution from a defined contribution plan have standing to sue as "participants" under [§ 502(a)(2) of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(2)].

The appellees argue that the plaintiffs are not seeking ?benefits? but ?damages.?  The First figures that ?the full ?benefit? to which the participant is entitled by a defined contribution plan is ?the value of [her] account unencumbered by any fiduciary impropriety.??  Then, they justify their conclusion with a bunch of cites to other circuits and policy reasons.  So, whatever the case, the plaintiffs have standing and the District Court has jurisdiction. 

The backstory involves the fact that the plan invested in the employer, W.R. Grace?s stock.  This stock wasn?t doing too well because of the asbestos-related product-liability litigation. 

Full post as published by Appellate Law and Practice on July 21, 2008 (boomark / email).