IN THIS ISSUE:

UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT UPDATE...2

SELECT CIRCUIT COURT DECISION SUMMARIES...2

DICKINSON WRIGHT ERISA PRACTICE INFORMATION...4

DICKINSON WRIGHT ERISA ATTORNEYS...4

Excerpt from United States Supreme Court Update

CIGNA v. Amara, 131 S. Ct. 1866 (May 16, 2011)

As expected in our last issue, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in a case concerning alleged inconsistencies between a summary plan description and the full plan document, and the possible available equitable remedies to participants who claimed harm arising from the difference in information. The Court found that a summary plan description does not constitute the terms of a plan for purposes of enforcing plan terms pursuant to Section 502(a)(1 (B) such that relief was not available under that section of ERISA. Instead, the Court remanded the case for consideration of the “appropriate equitable relief” available under Section 502(a)(3), and reasoned (arguably in dicta) that the standard of harm required depends on the type of relief sought....