Mertens v. Hewitt Associates
United States Supreme Court
508 U.S. 248 (1993)
- Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD
Facts
William Mertens and other individuals (plaintiffs) were employees of the Kaiser Steel Corporation (Kaiser) and enrolled in the Kaiser Steel Retirement Plan, a benefit plan governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Hewitt Associates (Hewitt) (defendant) served as the retirement plan’s actuary in 1980, when Kaiser began phasing out some of its operations. Due to the phaseout, Mertens and many other employees retired early. However, Hewitt failed to change the plan’s actuarial assumptions to reflect the impact of the early retirements. As a result, Kaiser failed to adequately fund the plan, causing the plan to be terminated and denying Mertens and the other retirees a substantial amount of the benefit entitled to them under the plan. The retirees sued Hewitt in federal district court for acting as a nonfiduciary that knowingly participated in the plan fiduciaries’ breach of their duty. The district court dismissed the complaint, and the retirees appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The court of appeals affirmed, and the retirees appealed to the United States Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Scalia, J.)
Dissent (White, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 803,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.