United States Second Circuit

In this case involving pension benefits to a plaintiff class, the district court's order requiring defendant CIGNA Corporation's to provide plaintiffs with a combination of defined benefit plan and cash balance plan (A+B) benefits under ERISA section 502(a)(3) and denying defendants' motion to decertify the class of plaintiffs seeking relief is affirmed, where: 1) the district court acted within its discretion in denying defendants' motion to decertify the plaintiff class; 2) the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the elements of reformation have been satisfied and that the plan should be reformed to adhere to representations made by the plan administrator; and 3) it was not an abuse of discretion for the district court to limit relief to A+B benefits rather than ordering a return to the terms of defendants' original retirement plan.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/23/2014
• Published 12/23/2014

Judges

• Livingston

Court

• United States Second Circuit

Counsel