On June 18, 2007, the United States Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari to hear the appeal of this Fourth Circuit case.  Their ruling will once again affect the application of ERISA.  Plaintiff (employee LaRue) alleged that the administrator had failed to invest his funds as instructed, resulting in a loss.  He sought monetary rewards, and both the District Court and Court of Appeals determined that the remedy he sought fell outside the scope of “equitable relief” § 1132(a)(3) of ERISA authorized. Money damages were the classic form of legal relief, absent from the list of equitable remedies available under § 1132(a)(3). Plaintiff could not recover under an equitable restitution theory since he did not allege that funds owed to him were in defendants’ possession but instead that the funds never materialized.

The Supreme Court will answer two questions posed by these cases.  First, does ERISA allow a single Participant to bring an action to recover for losses attributable to a fiduciary breach?  The second question, which is more important for our purposes, is whether ERISA permits a Plan Participant to bring an action for monetary relief for a fiduciary breach?  The Supreme Court has stated that these questions warrant review due to the fact that the ability to bring claims for relief under ERISA is both important and recurring, and the ability to do so has been “left open by this Court and continues to divide and confuse the courts of appeal.”  The Court is referring to Knudson, Sereboff, and their progeny in this statement.  This case provides us with a new opportunity to further enforce your right to pursue specifically identified funds in Federal Court.

Tags:

This entry was posted by Adam V. Russo on Wednesday, July 18th, 2007 at 4:36 pm and is filed under 4th, ERISA, Fiduciary Liability, Third Party Administrators. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.