Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=371104
 
 

Citations (3)



 


 



What Erisa Means by 'Equitable': The Supreme Court's Trail of Error in Russell, Mertens and Great-West


John H. Langbein


Yale University - Law School

2003

Columbia Law Review, Vol. 103, No. 6, 2003
Yale Law & Economics Research Paper No. 269

Abstract:     
In a pair of cases decided by 5-4 majorities (Mertens, 1993; Great-West, 2002) interpreting the scope of remedy for wrongdoing under ERISA, the Supreme Court construed the statute's grant of "appropriate equitable relief" to prevent the victims of ERISA-prohibited conduct from being compensated for consequential injury. The Court read ERISA's authorization of "appropriate equitable relief" to have disinterred the law/equity division from the era before the two systems were fused in the 1930s, and the Court treated equity as not having awarded monetary relief. As a consequence, lower courts have held ERISA to preclude remedy in a host of situations in which wrongful plan administration (almost always in violation of ERISA's fiduciary rules) has caused expense, physical harm, or other suffering. This Article explains why and how the Court's interpretation of ERISA remedy law went wrong, beginning with the Court's earlier encounter with the field in Russell (1985). The main theme is that the reach of trust-law principles in ERISA is far deeper and more controlling than the opinions in Mertens and Great-West allow. When federalizing the administration of pension and employee benefit plans in ERISA, Congress made a deliberate choice to subject these plans to the pre-existing regime of trust law rather than to invent a new regulatory structure. In this dimension, ERISA is federal trust law. Congress intended ERISA remedy law to replicate the core principles of trust remedy law in the regulation of pension and benefit plans, including the long-familiar make-whole standard of trust remedy law.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 50

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: January 17, 2003 ; Last revised: June 11, 2013

Suggested Citation

Langbein, John H., What Erisa Means by 'Equitable': The Supreme Court's Trail of Error in Russell, Mertens and Great-West (2003). Columbia Law Review, Vol. 103, No. 6, 2003. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=371104

Contact Information

John H. Langbein (Contact Author)
Yale University - Law School ( email )
P.O. Box 208215
New Haven, CT 06520-8215
United States
(202) 432-7299 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 5,305
Downloads: 573
Download Rank: 26,105
Citations:  3

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.391 seconds