Hughes v. Northwestern University

Hughes v. Northwestern University
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided January 24, 2022
Full case nameHughes v. Northwestern University
Docket no.19-1401
Citations595 U.S. ___ (more)
Holding
The Seventh Circuit erred in relying on the participants' ultimate choice over their investments to excuse allegedly imprudent decisions by respondents. Determining whether petitioners state plausible claims against plan fiduciaries for violations of ERISA's duty of prudence requires a context-specific inquiry of the fiduciaries’ continuing duty to monitor investments and to remove imprudent ones.
Court membership
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Clarence Thomas · Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito · Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan · Neil Gorsuch
Brett Kavanaugh · Amy Coney Barrett
Case opinion
MajoritySotomayor, joined by unanimous
Barrett took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
Laws applied
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974

Hughes v. Northwestern University, 595 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the Seventh Circuit erred in relying on the participants' ultimate choice over their investments to excuse allegedly imprudent decisions by respondents. Determining whether petitioners state plausible claims against plan fiduciaries for violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974's duty of prudence requires a context-specific inquiry of the fiduciaries’ continuing duty to monitor investments and to remove imprudent ones.[1][2]

References

  1. ^ Hughes v. Northwestern University, No. 19-1401, 595 U.S. ___ (2022).
  2. ^ "Court reaffirms duties of retirement-plan sponsors to monitor and update plan options". SCOTUSblog. 2022-01-24. Retrieved 2024-10-31.
  • Text of Hughes v. Northwestern University, No. 19-1401, 595 U.S. ___ (2022) is available from: Justia

This article incorporates written opinion of a United States federal court. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the text is in the public domain. "[T]he Court is unanimously of opinion that no reporter has or can have any copyright in the written opinions delivered by this Court." Wheaton v. Peters, 33 U.S. (8 Pet.) 591, 668 (1834)

Stub icon

This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.