partial win for employees who invest in company stock, a unanimous U.S. Supreme
Court ruled that fiduciaries of employee stock ownership plans aren't entitled
to a presumption of prudence protecting them from liability for declining share
Calling the judge-made presumption a “defense-friendly standard,” Justice Stephen G. Breyer wrote in the court's June 25 opinion that ESOP fiduciaries are subject to the same prudent-person standard that applies to fiduciaries of all plans governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, except for the requirement to diversify plan assets.
Although the court invalidated what has come to be known as the Moench presumption, ERISA practitioners agreed that the ruling didn't leave ESOP fiduciaries unable to defend themselves from stock-drop lawsuits.
The court emphasized that, in the absence of “special circumstances,” fiduciaries of publicly traded companies can't be liable for failing to act on publicly available information, as that would require them to outsmart the market.
The court also said that fiduciaries can't be found imprudent for failing to act in a way that would violate insider trading laws. ESOP participants bringing claims based on inside information must plausibly allege an alternative action that the fiduciaries could have taken that wouldn't violate securities or other laws and that wouldn't have been likely to harm the plan, the court concluded.
The court's decision left open a number of questions for lower courts to consider, including:
• In the
context of publicly traded employer stock, what “special circumstances” are
needed to show that an ESOP fiduciary acted imprudently in weighing publicly
• In the context of allegations that an ESOP fiduciary should have taken action based on inside information or disclosed that information to the public, to what extent does the potential imposition of ERISA liability conflict with the requirements or objectives of insider trading and federal securities laws?
• Could a prudent fiduciary in possession of inside information negatively affecting stock price reasonably determine that disclosing such information would “do more harm than good?”
Fiduciaries Still Have Options
Scott Macey, president and chief executive of the ERISA Industry Committee in Washington, said that while the opinion looked at first glance like a win for plan participants, the court actually provided many tools for fiduciaries to use in defending meritless stock-drop lawsuits.
“I don't think there are big winners and losers at this point,” Macey told Bloomberg BNA on June 25. “If the case gets interpreted by the lower courts in the way I understand it, I think that it's initially a little easier for plaintiffs, because they don't have to deal with the Moench presumption at all.”
“On the other hand, I don't think the fiduciary defendants should take it on the chin that much, because I think the Supreme Court is saying that there are other ways for them to defend these nonmeritorious cases,” Macey said.
He added that plaintiffs will need to show that there is a substantial reason that a fiduciary shouldn't have relied on the market price of the stock, which is considered to be based on publicly available information, or that the fiduciary could have taken some action neither violative of the law—including insider trading laws—nor harmful to participants if the fiduciary had non-public information.
Macey also said that the case gives lower courts a lot to consider in determining whether to dismiss these types of cases in the early stages of litigation.
“The roadmap for defendants and courts becomes somewhat more complex, but I don't think this decision should rule out dismissing a lot of these nonmeritorious cases early on, before they cause years of litigation and costs,” Macey said.
Excerpted from a story that ran in Pension & Benefits Daily (06/25/2014).
All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to email@example.com.
Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)
Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).
This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)