The pension plans and benefits packages of private sector employees in the District of Columbia and around the country are protected by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. ERISA claims are often filed over alleged breaches of fiduciary duties connected to complex stock transactions, but they may also arise when plan documents contain language that could be subject to more than one interpretation. Such a dispute was recently argued in a federal court in Connecticut over how the word 'maximum" in a life insurance policy should be interpreted.
Several industry groups in Washington, D.C., are urging the Supreme Court to rule in a case addressing required disclosures for retirement plans covered by ERISA, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Several organizations, including the National Association of Manufacturers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Benefits Council and the American Retirement Association, submitted a joint friend-of-the-court brief calling on the nation's highest court to overturn a decision by the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. In that decision, the court allowed a lawsuit over an alleged breach of fiduciary duties by a plan manager to move forward.