Edward A. Zelinsky is the Morris and Annie Trachman Professor of Law at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law of Yeshiva University. In the article below, Zelinsky discuses the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in LaRue v. DeWolff, Boberg & Associates, Inc. In LaRue, the Court twice cited an article by Zelinsky. That cited article was an earlier version of several chapters in Zelinsky’s new book, The Origins of the Ownership Society: How The Defined Contribution Paradigm Changed America.
In the pension community, the recent decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in LaRue v. DeWolff, Boberg & Associates, Inc. is widely perceived as a watershed development. In LaRue, a participant in his employer’s 401(k) plan claimed that the plan failed to execute the participant’s investment instructions. This failure, Mr. LaRue alleged, resulted in a lower account balance in his 401(k) account. The U.S. Supreme Court held that Mr. LaRue, if indeed harmed by the inaction of the plan’s fiduciaries, may sue for relief under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). (more…)
0 Comments on LaRue and 401(k): What’s The Fuss About? as of 1/1/1990
Add a Comment