Dist. Ct. did not err in dismissing portion of plaintiffs-plan beneficiaries’ action, alleging that defendants-pension plans violated ERISA by failing to rollover said plans to plans maintained by different union, which had become plaintiffs’ new union. Plaintiffs could not pursue portion of lawsuit calling for Trustees’ rollover of assets to new plans or for defendants’ amendment of plans to include rollover of assets, where terms of plans did not call for rollover or for distribution of assets to plaintiffs under instant circumstances, and plaintiffs did not show existence of violation of terms of plans. Also plaintiffs could not proceed on portion of lawsuit alleging that defendants breached fiduciary duties by paying excessive administrative fees or for failing to disclose conflicts of interests, even though Trustees received salaries from plans, where: (1) plaintiffs failed to allege what other plans paid in terms of administrative fees or otherwise provide insight as to how said fees were excessive; and (2) for purpose of plaintiff’s conflict of interest claims, ERISA allows Trustees of plans to occupy multiple roles and to draw salaries from plans. However, Dist. Ct erred in granting defendants' summary judgment with respect to plaintiffs’ claim that one plan overpaid plan administrator, where defendants’ explanation that salary was reasonable was affirmative defense that could not be asserted in instant motion to dismiss.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Civil Court
ERISA