1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |LaRue and Its Implications: The Next Wave of ERISA Fiduciary Breach Litigation

LaRue and Its Implications: The Next Wave of ERISA Fiduciary Breach Litigation

Event | 03.25.08, 12:00 AM UTC - 12:00 AM UTC

The recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court in LaRue v. Dewolf Boberg & Assoc holds that participants in account-based plans have the right to sue plan administrators for damages caused by fiduciary breaches affecting their individual accounts. The plaintiff in LaRue claims that the employer’s 401k plan had mishandled his request to change investment options in his individual plan account. The LaRue decision signals a significant expansion in ERISA benefit plan litigation; it expands the remedies potentially available to plan participants in a variety of circumstances that implicate ERISA’s fiduciary duty rules.


Crowell & Moring represents the employer in LaRue. Please join a panel of Crowell & Moring ERISA, specialists, joined by Karen Handorf of Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, a prominent ERISA plaintiff’s lawyer, as they review the Court’s decision in LaRue. The session will examine the implications for various types of ERISA litigation against employers, plan sponsors, and service providers to ERISA plans.



Additional Reading:


Click for Panel Bios:
Tom Gies [PDF]
Karen Handorf [PDF]
Bill Flanagan
Jane Foster

For more information, please visit these areas: Labor and Employment

Insights

Event | 02.20.25

Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today

Has the Buss Stopped? Recoupment Today: In 1997, the California Supreme Court decided Buss v. Superior Court. In Buss, the court concluded that a liability insurer that defended a mixed action could seek reimbursement from the insured for the defense costs associated with the claims that were not even potentially covered. Since then, numerous courts have held that insurers are entitled to recoup their defense costs associated with uncovered claims or causes of action. On the other hand, a significant number of courts have rejected insurers’ right to recoupment, at least in the absence of a policy provision granting the insurer that right. Some commentators have even suggested that the current judicial trend might be away from permitting insurers to recoup their defense costs. Is that correct? Has the Buss stopped? This panel of coverage experts will analyze insurers’ claimed right to recoupment today, and offer their perspectives on what the law on recoupment should perhaps be and might be in the future.

View All Insights