Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

Tibble v. Edison Int'l

Docket No.: 13-1333
Certiorari Granted: Oct 2 2014
Argued: February 23, 2015
Decided: May 18, 2015

Topics:

ERISA, Employee Retirement Income Security Act, defined-contribution plan, due diligence, equitable relief

PartyNames: Andre Lee Coleman, aka Andre Lee Coleman-Bey v. Todd Tollefson, et al.
Petitioner: Andre Lee Coleman, aka Andre Lee Coleman-Bey
Respondent: Todd Tollefson, et al.

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Citation: 733 F.3d 175
Supreme Court Docket

Andre Lee Coleman, aka Andre Lee Coleman-Bey
v.
Todd Tollefson, et al.
Background:

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) imposes duties on retirement plan fiduciaries that are "the highest known to the law", and provides a six-year statute of limitations for plan participants to pursue an action for breach of those duties. Although Plaintiffs obtained a judgment that their 401(k) plan fiduciaries had breached their duties by selecting certain investment funds for their plan within six years of the complaint, the Ninth Circuit held that an identical claim as to other funds that were imprudent for the same reason, and continued to harm Plaintiffs at the time of their complaint, was time-barred because the funds were initially selected more than six years earlier. The Ninth Circuit also replaced ERISA's stringent fiduciary standard with the deferential standard of review that Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, 489 U.S. 101 (1989) adopted in $1132(a)(1)(B) actions challenging denials of benefits.

Consideration Limited:

GRANTED LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: "WHETHER A CLAIM THAT ERISA PLAN FIDUCIARIES BREACHED THEIR DUTY OF PRUDENCE BY OFFERING HIGHER-COST RETAIL-CLASS MUTUAL FUNDS TO PLAN PARTICIPANTS, EVEN THOUGH IDENTICAL LOWER-COST INSTITUTION-CLASS MUTUAL FUNDS WERE AVAILABLE, IS BARRED BY 29 U.S.C. $1113(1) WHEN FIDUCIARIES INITIALLY CHOSE THE HIGHER-COST MUTUAL FUNDS AS PLAN INVESTMENTS MORE THAN SIX YEARS BEFORE THE CLAIM WAS FILED."

Question Presented:

Whether, under the "three strikes" provision of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. 1915(g), a district court's dismissal of a lawsuit counts as a "strike" while it is still pending on appeal or before the time for seeking appellate review has passed.

Tibble v. Edison Int'l
ORAL ARGUMENT

February 23, 2015

Listen to Oral Argument in Tibble v. Edison Int'l
Holding: AFFIRMED
Vote: 9-0
Majority: unanimous
Opinion By:
Database Connection failed: SQLSTATE[HY000] [1045] Access denied for user 'restauz8_sophi'@'localhost' (using password: YES)