Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma
Issues
Does the three-year limitations period under Section 413(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) start to run when the plaintiff learns of an alleged breach of fiduciary duty or when the plaintiff has access to relevant information that shows the alleged breach but did not read or understand that information?
The Supreme Court will decide when Section 1113(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act’s statute of limitations begins to run. Both parties agree that the text of Section 1113(2) establishes that the three-year statute of limitations runs from the date on which the plaintiff had actual knowledge of a violation, but dispute what actual knowledge means. Petitioner Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee argues that actual knowledge means being in possession of proof of the violation, whether a plaintiff is aware of the violation or not. Respondent Christopher M. Sulyma argues that actual knowledge means when the plaintiff is fully aware and understands that a violation took place. The Court’s decision will affect both employers’ incentives to offer retirement plans and also employees who struggle to comprehend the complex and lengthy plan documents provided to them by their employers.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
Whether the three-year limitations period in Section 413(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, which runs from “the earliest date on which the plaintiff had actual knowledge of the breach or violation,” bars suit when all the relevant information was disclosed to the plaintiff by the defendants more than three years before the plaintiff filed the complaint, but the plaintiff chose not to read or could not recall having read the information.
Petitioners Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee, et al. (collectively, “Intel Corp.”) employed Respondent Christopher Sulyma from 2010 to 2012. Sulyma v.
Edited by
Additional Resources
- Anne Wallace, Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma to Shape ERISA Fiduciary Lawsuits, Lawyers & Settlements (Nov. 5, 2019).
- Rebecca Moore, Attorneys Argue for Stricter Reading of ‘Actual Knowledge’ in ERISA Cases, Plan Adviser (Nov. 9, 2019).
- J. Ian Downes, Andrew L. Oringer & Samuel Scarritt-Selman, Three Strikes and You’re in – Supreme Court to Hear Three ERISA Cases in Upcoming Term, JD Supra (Oct. 16, 2019).