August 17, 2017

August 17, 2017

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

August 16, 2017

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

August 15, 2017

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Recent Supreme Court Ruling Spares Church Plans from Surge of ERISA Fiduciary Duty Litigation

Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court stopped the advance of plaintiff class action suits against the fiduciaries of church plans.

The past 20 years have seen a sharp rise in employee class actions directed against the persons and entities that administer employer-sponsored retirement plans. The vast majority of such plans are governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq. The rise in ERISA plan litigation has been fueled in part by the nature of benefit plans and the framework of ERISA, which facilitate the prosecution of nationwide class actions by participants who claim that a plan’s fiduciaries violated duties established by ERISA. The rise also is fueled in no small part by the size of the claims, with fairly common reports of ERISA class action settlements in excess of $100 million.

In recent years the ERISA plaintiff’s bar has turned its eyes on one the few types of pension plans that traditionally have been viewed as exempt from the regulatory scheme of ERISA. ERISA exempts from its regulatory reach an employee benefit plan if, among other things, “such plan is a church plan (as defined in section 1002(33) of this title)....” The recent wave of ERISA lawsuits directed against fiduciaries of church plans has focused on the question of whether, in order to qualify as a church plan under ERISA, a plan that is managed by an “organization controlled by or associated with a church” 29 U.S.C. § 1002(33)(C)(i), must have been established by a church. The district courts were split over the question. Three federal appellate courts held that to qualify as a church plan under ERISA a plan did have to have been established by a church.

On June 5, 2017, the United States Supreme Court reversed those appellate courts in Advocate Health Care Network v. Stapleton, Nos. 16–74, 16–86, 16–258, 2017 WL 2407476 (U.S. June 5, 2017). After examining the legislative history relevant to the church plan exemption, and after textual analysis of the provisions bearing on that exemption, the Supreme Court held:

The question presented here is whether a church must have originally established such a plan for it to so qualify. ERISA, we hold, does not impose that requirement.

Id. at *2.

This decision is significant on many levels. The ruling plainly is significant with respect to the management of plans that are managed by an “organization controlled by or associated with a church,” regardless of whether the plans were created by a church. The ruling also is significant for class action litigation as it likely will put a stop to, or at least redirect, suits directed against fiduciaries of plans that are subject to ERISA’s church plan exemption. Moreover, Advocate Health is significant with respect to the scope of its reach. As Justice Sotomayor noted in her concurring opinion, a great many entities that have benefit plans within the exemption for plans managed by an “organization controlled by or associated with a church” today “bear little resemblance to those Congress considered when enacting the 1980 amendment to the church plan definition.” Id. at *11.

© Copyright 2017 Armstrong Teasdale LLP. All rights reserved

TRENDING LEGAL ANALYSIS


About this Author

Scott Hunt, Tax attorney, Armstrong Teasdale, law firm
Partner

A member of the firm’s Tax practice group, Scott Hunt handles matters relating to employee benefit and exempt organizations issues.

In the heavily regulated and constantly evolving field of employee benefits law, Scott monitors and analyzes all new legislation and regulations. He regularly designs stock option plans, phantom or restricted stocks, bonuses and various other types of incentive compensation plans and arrangements and advises with respect to tax, securities and corporate law issues that arise in connection with the establishment and administration of such plans.

...

314-342-4145
Patrick J. Kenny, Armstrong Teasdale Law firm, Litigation Attorney
Partner

Patrick Kenny is a trial lawyer with emphasis on complex litigation and appellate work including bad faith and insurance coverage disputes, ERISA litigation (pension and benefits), subrogation, cases involving business "divorces," non-compete and trade secrets, fraud and business torts. He has tried cases to verdict in Missouri and Illinois.  Mr. Kenny has been listed as a Top Rated Lawyer in Commercial Litigation by Martindale-Hubbell and American Lawyer Media (ALM) since 2012, been listed as a Missouri/Kansas Super Lawyers / Super Lawyers Business Edition since 2010, and has been listed in the Best Lawyers in America for Insurance Law since 2007.  Mr. Kenny also has been active with an international law group, Lex Mundi, for many years, currently serving as the Chair of the Insurance/Reinsurance Practice Group.  He also published and presented extensively on matters related to insurance, fraud, and expert witnesses.

314-552-6613
Sarah Sise practices exclusively in the heavily regulated and constantly evolving field of employee benefits and executive compensation.
Partner

Sarah Sise practices exclusively in the heavily regulated and constantly evolving field of employee benefits and executive compensation. She advises a wide range of clients, including closely-held companies, tax-exempt organizations and public companies.

Sarah brings over 17 years of experience to the firm and partners with clients to establish, design and implement qualified retirement plans, non-qualified arrangements, welfare and fringe benefit plans, and executive compensation programs. She also guides clients through plan audits and service provider changes.

 

314.342.8062