ERISA & Employee Benefits Litigation

Representative Matters

• Hirt v. The Equitable Retirement Plan, 2008 WL 2675828 (2d Cir. July 9, 2008).  Ruling in two cases argued in tandem, including the appeal of the claim against our client, Verizon Communications, the Second Circuit became the fourth circuit to rule in favor of cash balance plans against age discrimination challenges under ERISA.
• Harris Trust and Savings Bank v. Salomon Smith Barney, Inc., 530 U.S. 238 (2000).  The U.S. Supreme Court reversed summary judgment against our client Harris Trust, as trustee of the Ameritech pension trust, and held that ERISA permitted a fiduciary to sue a non-fiduciary party in interest that had participated in a prohibited transaction.
• Cooper v. IBM Personal Pension Plan, 457 F.3d 636 (7th Cir. 2006), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 1143 (January 16, 2007).  In the first decision on this issue by an appellate court, the Seventh Circuit ruled that IBM's cash balance formula complied with the age provision of ERISA.  The appellate victory was especially important to IBM because the parties had stipulated that IBM would pay $1.4 billion as remedies and fees if it did not prevail on appeal.
• Edes v. Verizon Communications Inc., 417 F.3d 133 (1st Cir. 2005).  The First Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of our client Verizon on claims by contract employees that they were entitled to participate in company benefit plans.
• Augienello v. Coast-to-Coast Financial Corp., 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 8770, 30 Empl. Ben. Cas. (BNA) 2280 (2d Cir. 2003).  The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of employees’ claims against our client Coast-to-Coast Financial Corporation for severance pay and deferred compensation.
• Capital Cities/ABC, Inc. v. Ratcliff, 141 F.3d 1405 (10th Cir. 1998).  The Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for our client Capital Cities/ABC against a class of plaintiffs alleging that the company had wrongfully excluded them from its employee benefit plans.