Washington, D.C., February 27, 2025 – The ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC) yesterday filed an amicus brief in the U.S. District Court of the Northern District of New York supporting Defendant’s motion to dismiss in Bueno v. General Electric (Bueno). The American Benefit Council also joined in the brief, which asserts that the Plaintiffs lack standing and that the complaint did not allege a viable claim for relief.
Bueno is a putative class action brought by former GE employees challenging a transaction in which a defined benefit pension plan maintained by GE purchased annuity contracts from an insurance company by transferring assets to the insurer, which agreed to be liable for payment of the former employees’ pension benefits. Plaintiffs alleged that this “pension risk transfer” transaction breached ERISA’s fiduciary duties because the insurance company chosen for the transaction was not the “safest” annuity provider.
“In Bueno, the Plaintiffs claim to have been harmed by a transaction that everyone acknowledges is permitted by applicable law,” said Tom Christina, Executive Director of the ERIC Legal Center. “In reality, if claims like this are not swiftly dismissed, then the actual harm lies in the impact this could have on current and future pension programs. If employers are continually forced to divert limited resources into endless legal battles, they won’t have the means to invest in the voluntary retirement plans that so many employees rely on for their financial security in retirement. The court has an opportunity to end this case and send a clear message to the trial bar: The court will not reward meritless litigation.”
Earlier in the case, ERIC filed an amicus brief with the court supporting GE’s motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs’ complaint. In their amicus brief, ERIC urged the court to dismiss the case, explaining that the Plaintiffs lack standing to sue because they failed to allege an actual injury to their legal interests stemming from the transaction and because they failed to allege any viable claim for relief. The motion to dismiss became moot because the Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint, which is the subject of the current motion to dismiss.
Seyfarth Shaw LLP prepared the amicus brief, which is available here.
