TIBBLE
v.
EDISON
INTERNATIONAL
What Does This Decision Mean For Plan Fiduciaries?
By Angel L. Garrett, Trucker Huss APC
“ In its detailed decision,
the court addresses a myriad
of issues that are essential
for plan fiduciaries in
understanding how to limit
and avoid liability under the
Employee Retirement Income
Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”)
going forward.”
O
n March 21, 2013, the Ninth Circuit issued
its opinion in Tibble v. Edison International,
affirming the district court’s decision in a case
where participants alleged that 401(k) plan
fiduciaries breached their duties of loyalty and prudence
by including certain investment options in the plan, such as
retail-class mutual funds, and engaging in revenue sharing.
This decision resulted from the plaintiffs’ appeal of the
district court’s partial grant of summary judgment to the
defendants, and the defendants’ cross-appeal of the posttrial decision. In its detailed decision, the court addresses
a myriad of issues that are essential for plan fiduciaries
in understanding how to limit and avoid liability under
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(“ERISA”) going forward.
Fiduciary Duty When Selecting
Retail-Class Mutual Funds
The Ninth Circuit upheld the lower court’s post-trial
decision that the defendants acted imprudently by including
retail-class shares of three mutual funds in the Edison
401(k) Savings Plan’s (“Plan”) investment menu without
www.conferomag.com | 13