A former attorney at the now-defunct Philadelphia-based law firm Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP has advanced a proposed class action alleging that the firm mismanaged the retirement benefits of non-equity partners and counsel. According to a recent report, the attorney claimed “interrelated violations” of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) in connection with Schnader’s handling of plan contributions.
The ruling by Judge John M. Younge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania found that there is a factual dispute as to whether the contributions in question qualify as employee or employer contributions, which are subject to different requirements under ERISA. Judge Younge indicated that discovery is necessary to determine the status of the plan contributions, highlighting a key legal distinction that could significantly impact the case outcome. The full details can be reviewed in the order docketed Tuesday.
For legal professionals closely following ERISA-related litigation, this case underscores the complexities involved in managing and litigating retirement plan contributions, especially in situations where firms are dissolved. It also serves as a poignant reminder of the critical need for clear delineations between employee and employer contributions within retirement plans, as well as the fiduciary responsibilities involved.