On February 9, 2023, the Honorable Jennifer L. Thurston of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California determined that class action claims alleging breaches of fiduciary duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act survived the motion to dismiss filed by Sutter Health and the Retirement Benefits Investment Committee of Sutter Health.
On January 4, 2023, a Class of California-based flight attendants for Virgin America, Inc. and Alaska Airlines obtained a settlement of nearly $31 million in resolution of the airlines’ alleged violations of the California Labor Code, California Unfair Competition Law, and California Private Attorneys General Act.
On January 31, 2023, the Honorable Edmund A. Sargus, Jr. of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio granted final approval of a $2.75 million settlement in a class action lawsuit against L Brands, Inc. alleging mismanagement of the L Brands, Inc. 401(k) Savings and Retirement Plan.
On December 7, 2022, United States District Judge Janet C. Hall of the District of Connecticut partially denied the Motion to Strike Plaintiffs’ Jury Demand filed by New England energy provider Eversource Energy Company, finding that Defendants cannot preclude a jury trial against 11,000 former and current participants in the Eversource 401(k) Plan.
Plaintiffs, represented by Miller Shah LLP, alleged that Defendants breached their fiduciary duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) by (1) selecting and retaining the risky Fidelity Freedom Funds Active Suite, instead of retaining a more prudent alternative, and (2) allowing participants to be charged excessive recordkeeping and administrative fees.
The Settlement Agreement defines the Settlement Class as “all Facebook users in the United States during the Class Period,” which is May 24, 2007 to December 22, 2022, inclusive. Counsel estimates this number to be between 250 million to 280 million people.
On November 4, 2022, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that for the purposes of the Fair Labor Stands Act, Los Angeles County qualifies as a joint employer of In-Home Supportive Services providers.
Plaintiffs allege that the company violated and will further violate the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, as well as the California WARN Act, both of which offer protection to workers, their families, and communities by requiring employers to provide notice 60 days in advance of covered plant closings and mass layoffs.
Plaintiffs alleged Defendants breached their fiduciary duties pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 by selecting and retaining risky and underperforming investment options in the Plan and allowing Plan participants to be charged unreasonably expensive investment management fees, resulting in significant losses.
On September 22, 2022, a District Judge in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California certified a class of over 30,000 people in a lawsuit against Genentech, Inc., and the U.S. Roche DC Fiduciary Committee.
Telephone: 866-540-5505 • Fax: 866-300-7367 | Se habla Español
19712 MacArthur Boulevard, Suite 222
Irvine, CA 92612
Map and Directions
1230 Columbia Street, Suite 1140
San Diego, CA 92101
Map and Directions
456 Montgomery Street, Suite 1900
San Francisco, CA 94104
Map and Directions
65 Main Street
Chester, CT 06412
Map and Directions
1625 N. Commerce Pkwy, Suite 320
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33326
Map and Directions
2 Hudson Place, Suite 100
Hoboken, NJ 07030
Map and Directions
225 Broadway, Suite 1830
New York, NY 10007
Map and Directions
1845 Walnut Street, Suite 806
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Map and Directions