The Supreme Court’s Decision in Tibble v. Edison International: What Are the Must Know Lessons for Plan Fiduciaries?

The Supreme Court’s decision in Tibble v. Edison International may be as important for what it didn’t say, as for what it did say.

In summary, the Court held that an ERISA investment fiduciary has an ongoing duty to monitor plan investments and that an allegation of a breach of this duty may give rise to a timely claim even when the fiduciary’s initial selection of an investment would be barred by ERISA’s six-year statute of limitations.  

In holding that an investment fiduciary has an ongoing duty to monitor plan investments, the Court didn’t tell us anything we didn’t already know.  At the same time, the Court’s thoughtful criticism of the Ninth Circuit’s definition of what constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty in this instance is significant, because it could be read to come close to what, in effect, amounts to a “continuing violation” theory, thus leaving plan investment fiduciaries liable for imprudent investments selected long ago --- and even before they became a fiduciary!  

More Information