Kokoshka v. The Investment Advisory Comm. of Columbia Univ.

Plaintiff Fails to Show Breach of Fiduciary Duty in ERISA Claim Against Investment Advisor

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

OPINION AND ORDER Columbia University has established an employee benefit plan that is funded through contributions made on behalf of eligible employees. Although the employees decide how their contributions are invested, the Investment Advisory Committee of Columbia University (the “Committee”) retains the sole discretion to identify the available investment options. Plaintiff Jerry Martin Kokoshka, Ph.D., a participant in this retirement plan, directed that all his contributions be invested in a particular fund that, at the time, the Committee offered. In this action, Plaintiff brings a claim under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), arguing that the Committee breached its fiduciary duty when it decided to remove that fund from the menu of available investments. Before the Court is the Committee’s motion for summary judgment. The Committee argues that it is protected from liability by a safe harbor provision in ERISA that applies to circumstances where an employee can decide how to invest their assets among different options. In the alternative, the Committee argues that Plaintiff has failed to allege facts or produce any evidence demonstrating a breach of fiduciary duty. While the Court finds the safe harbor provision inapplicable in this case, the Court agrees with the Committee that Plaintiff has failed to submit any triable issues of fact demonstrating a breach of fiduciary duty. Accordingly, the Committee’s motion for summary judgment is granted. I. Background A. Factual Background¹ 1. The Retirement Plan This lawsuit involves Plaintiff’s participation in the Retirement Plan for Officers of Columbia University, an employee benefit plan established by The Board of Trustees of Columbia University to “provide[] retirement income benefits to Eligible Employees of the University.” Dkt. 19-2, Exh. A (the “Retirement Plan”)

1.1, 1.2; Def. Rule 56.1 Stmt.

Kokoshka v. The Investment Advisory Comm. of Columbia Univ.

Plaintiff Fails to Show Breach of Fiduciary Duty in ERISA Claim Against Investment Advisor

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal