Blatt v. Marshall and Lassman

Abbey Blatt (plaintiff) was an accountant at the firm Marshall and Lassman (firm) (defendant). The firm participated in a retirement plan sponsored by a third-party organization. The third-party organization operated the plan to allow employees from different accounting firms to pool their money for retirement purposes. To join the plan, each employer had to make several elections regarding how the plan would operate for that particular employer. For example, an employer would choose a contribution formula and years-of-service requirement and decide whether employees could make voluntary contributions. Upon joining the plan, employers would have to regularly remit contributions to the plan and agree to furnish necessary information. If an employee left employment, that employee would no longer be able to participate in the plan under his employer. Blatt participated in the plan through the firm. When Blatt left the firm, he requested a lump-sum payment of the amount in his retirement account. The plan’s insurer informed Blatt that the firm would need to file a form with the plan regarding Blatt’s status as a former employee. Blatt and his lawyer made repeated requests to the firm to file the form. Eventually, Blatt sued the firm in federal court for violating its fiduciary duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). Blatt alleged that the firm had refused to file the form in order to gain an advantage in a separate lawsuit. The firm eventually filed the form after Blatt filed the ERISA lawsuit. But the district court granted summary judgment for the firm on the grounds that the firm was not a fiduciary under ERISA because it lacked a discretionary role in administering the plan. Blatt appealed.