ERISA's six-year statute of limitations cannot bar plaintiffs from recovering damages because "every breach of the (fiduciary's) obligation to review investments prudently and remove imprudent ones starts the running of a new limitations period."
That was the main argument made in court documents filed this week by the plaintiffs in the Tibble vs. Edison International case, the first involving excessive fees in 401(k)s to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The case, filed in 2007, alleged that fiduciaries of Edison's 401(k) plan breached their duty to provide prudent investments by offering retail-class shares of six mutual funds as investment options when lower-cost institutional-class shares of those funds were available.
Continue Reading for Free
Register and gain access to:
- Breaking benefits news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical converage of the property casualty insurance and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, PropertyCasualty360 and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
Nick Thornton
Nick Thornton is a financial writer covering retirement and health care issues for BenefitsPRO and ALM Media. He greatly enjoys learning from the vast minds in the legal, academic, advisory and money management communities when covering the retirement space. He's also written on international marketing trends, financial institution risk management, defense and energy issues, the restaurant industry in New York City, surfing, cigars, rum, travel, and fishing. When not writing, he's pushing into some land or water.
