I n CIGNA Corp. v. Amara, decided May 16, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the broad ERISA class remedies imposed by lower courts in a landmark ruling that threatens to change the rules on monetary damages awarded against plan fiduciaries (ERISA Section 502(a)(3)).

Responses to Amara from stakeholders have been mixed. The Department of Labor has hailed Amara as a landmark pronouncement that authorizes a broad range of relief, up to and including plan reformation, and attorneys for employees have said that substantial monetary relief is now available.  However, attorneys for ERISA fiduciaries and benefit plans argue that equitable relief is still limited and subject to the demonstration of proof of harm that will not be available in many ERISA class actions.

For employers caught in the often complex world of ERISA plan amendment and administration, mistakes and miscommunications occur in the best of plans. After Amara, however, such errors are even more likely to lead to expensive litigation.

Join James P. McElligott, Jr. and Bruce M. Steen, Partners at McGuireWoods LLP, as they share perspectives on whether and how Amara changes the remedies available in ERISA litigation. In this webinar, McElligott and Steen will explain:

• The scope of benefits claims under plan terms after Amara
• Implications of the ruling that summary plan descriptions cannot be enforced as plan terms under ERISA
• T he Supreme Court’s discussion of equitable remedies and whether it is binding on the Supreme Court and lower courts
• The prerequisites for obtaining relief under ERISA
• How Amara impacts class action litigation
• What steps employers and ERISA fiduciaries should take to help avoid liability after Amara

James P. McElligott, Jr., Partner, McGuireWoods LLP and Bruce M. Steen, Partner, McGuireWoods LLP