Nelson Mullins partners Scott Sherman and Matthew Zischke and associate Niki Patel authored a recent article published in Law360 analyzing the Eleventh Circuit's en banc decision in Bolton v. Inland Fresh Seafood Corp. of America Inc. and what it means for plan sponsors, fiduciaries, and their insurers.

In “What Axing ERISA Exhaustion Rule Means For Plan Sponsors,” Sherman, Zischke, and Patel explain that the court overruled its more-than-40-year-old decision in Mason v. Continental Group Inc. The Eleventh Circuit held that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) does not require administrative exhaustion before a participant may bring a statutory claim, including a claim for breach of fiduciary duty. The ruling applies retroactively, so it reaches pending cases. It does not change the exhaustion requirement for claims challenging a denial of benefits under the terms of a plan.

The authors highlight practical considerations that follow from the decision and note that the Eleventh Circuit left open whether parties may contract for exhaustion of statutory claims, and that the Department of Labor has signaled such provisions would face significant judicial scrutiny.

Subscribers may read the full article here.