Supreme Court hears 401(k) benchmark arguments in Anderson v. Intel

The Supreme Court has heard oral arguments in Anderson v. Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee, a case testing whether 401(k) participants alleging fiduciary imprudence from investment underperformance must identify a meaningful benchmark. The case was summarized in a Groom Law benefits brief based on Bloomberg Law.

Bloomberg Law's article, "Justices Debate How Much 401(k) Benchmark Guidance to Give," reports apparent agreement among the justices on the importance of meaningful investment comparisons. It also notes uncertainty about how specifically to define that standard for lower courts.

Will Delany, a Groom principal and leader of its litigation practice, was quoted by Bloomberg Law saying the matter "may be another ERISA issue that inspires a unanimous judgment, albeit with separate opinions."