Seyfarth Synopsis: A recent decision from the Eastern District of Michigan serves as a reminder that—while courts are often quick to certify classes in ERISA cases—plaintiffs must satisfy the requirements of Rule 23 and that...more
3/29/2023
/ Breach of Duty ,
Class Action ,
Class Certification ,
Class Representatives ,
Compensation & Benefits ,
Duty of Loyalty ,
Duty of Prudence ,
Employee Benefits ,
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) ,
Fiduciary Duty ,
FRCP 23(a) ,
Investment Management ,
Retirement Plan
Seyfarth Synopsis: After focusing most of its attention on retirement benefit plans, a recent complaint filed in the District of Connecticut shows that the plaintiffs’ bar is turning to health and welfare plans as targets for...more
Connecticut whistleblowers were handed a siren to sound the alarm on employers this week. In interpreting the state constitution in Trusz v. UBS Realty Investors, LLC, SC 19323 (Conn. Sup. Ct., official release Oct. 13,...more
10/10/2015
/ Breach of Duty ,
CT Supreme Court ,
Disability Discrimination ,
Discipline ,
First Amendment ,
Free Speech ,
Investors ,
Property Valuation ,
Public Concern ,
Real Estate Investments ,
Retaliation ,
Whistleblower Protection Policies ,
Whistleblowers ,
Wrongful Termination