Not just any ERISA practice can provide the full range of services you may need. Alston & Bird’s ERISA Litigation attorneys were among the first to dedicate their practices to ERISA and employee benefits disputes. We are one of only a few firms with attorneys who are both comprehensively trained ERISA practitioners and experienced litigators.
In 2018, for the second time in three years, U.S. News - Best Law Firms named Alston & Bird “Law Firm of the Year” in Litigation—ERISA, a distinction given annually to a single outstanding firm in each practice area. Alston & Bird’s ERISA Litigation Group has been ranked Tier One in National—ERISA Litigation by Best Lawyers every year since 2012. Lawyers in our group are consistently ranked as some of the best in the country by U.S. News, Best Lawyers, and Chambers.
Class actions involving 401(k) and 403(b) plans have grown exponentially in recent years. We represent employers, boards of directors, plan fiduciaries, and non-fiduciary service providers in all types of defined contribution litigation, including those involving investments, fees, and employer stock. Clients call on us to handle severance litigation brought by former executives and employees, and disputes involving private ESOP transactions. We also counsel fiduciaries through the administrative claims and appeals process, and handle litigation arising from the claims process.
ERISA Litigation
Employers, boards of directors, trustees, service providers, and insurers are all potential targets for ERISA litigation. We translate complicated, technical ERISA issues into business-practical solutions to help reduce litigation risk. And our ERISA trial lawyers are ready to aggressively defend you in litigation, when necessary. We have everything you need in one shop.
We are also the only major law firm in the country to have an attorney within its ERISA litigation group who is also a Fellow of the Society of Actuaries. This uniquely positions us to represent clients facing litigation over defined benefit plan funding and actuarial equivalence issues. We integrate legal analysis with an understanding of the underlying actuarial, cost, funding, administration, and benefit design considerations, providing an edge in actuarial malpractice litigation, pension benefit litigation, and fiduciary and compliance audits.
We have one of the most robust practices in defending actuarial malpractice cases. We have defended several actuarial firms in court, and numerous actuaries in regulatory actions before the IRS, the Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries, and the Actuarial Board for Counseling and Discipline. We have also resolved dozens of threatened actuarial malpractice cases without litigation and without paying settlements.
We’re one of the few firms that has tried cash balance plan litigation since its inception, along with anti-cutback and backloading issues. We also represent companies in multiemployer-plan litigation.
Our attorneys have strong relationships with the DOL, PBGC, and IRS. This inside perspective can benefit clients under investigation regarding civil and/or criminal violations of ERISA or the Code, or when facing audits and subpoenas.
We also represent a variety of managed care and insurance companies in increasingly complicated medical provider-payor disputes, health care fraud claims, and ERISA plan overpayment/reimbursement matters.
Your ERISA litigation matters call for a team that has seen it all and can offer you everything you need. You’ll find that at Alston & Bird.
We have one of the most robust practices in defending actuarial malpractice cases. We have defended several actuarial firms in court, and numerous actuaries in regulatory actions before the IRS, the Joint Board for the Enrollment of Actuaries, and the Actuarial Board for Counseling and Discipline. We have also resolved dozens of threatened actuarial malpractice cases without litigation and without paying settlements.
We’re one of the few firms that has tried cash balance plan litigation since its inception, along with anti-cutback and backloading issues. We also represent companies in multiemployer-plan litigation.
Our attorneys have strong relationships with the DOL, PBGC, and IRS. This inside perspective can benefit clients under investigation regarding civil and/or criminal violations of ERISA or the Code, or when facing audits and subpoenas.
We also represent a variety of managed care and insurance companies in increasingly complicated medical provider-payor disputes, health care fraud claims, and ERISA plan overpayment/reimbursement matters.
Your ERISA litigation matters call for a team that has seen it all and can offer you everything you need. You’ll find that at Alston & Bird.
- Handling four of the first wave of lawsuits filed challenging the use of certain actuarial equivalence factors used to calculate benefits in defined benefit pension plans. Herndon v. Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc. (E.D. Va.); Smith v. Rockwell Automation Inc. (E.D. Wis.); Berube v. Rockwell Automation Inc. (E.D. Wis.); Brown v. UPS (N.D. Ga.).
- Represented Insperity Inc., a professional employer organization, in a putative class action alleging excessive recordkeeping fees and imprudent investment options in a 401(k) plan offered to its client-employers. The plaintiffs and Reliance Trust Company settled this case post-trial, resulting in a complete dismissal and release of all claims against the Insperity defendants with no monetary or nonmonetary contribution from the Insperity defendants. Pledger v. Insperity, et al. (N.D. Ga.).
- Represented Brown University in a putative class action alleging excessive recordkeeping fees and imprudent investment options in two 403(b) plans offered to faculty and staff of the university. The settlement terms in this matter are the most favorable to defendants in any similar matter thus far. Short v. Brown University (D.R.I.).
- Represented Governor Rick Scott, Attorney General Pam Bondi, Chief Financial Officer Jeff Atwater, and other Florida state government officials sued by numerous plaintiffs regarding legislative changes to the Florida Retirement System, the state government’s pension system, alleging illegal cutbacks and constitutional violations. We represented the defense through the trial and subsequent appeals. The Supreme Court of Florida ruled in favor of our clients and upheld the 2011 pension reform law, closing a $1 billion-per-year gap in the budget for the state of Florida. Scott v. Williams (Fla.).
- Represented Norton Healthcare in a putative class action alleging that the defendants breached ERISA fiduciary duties by not choosing the lowest-cost share classes for mutual funds available in Norton’s 403(b) plan by choosing a stable-value fund as an investment option and by paying asset-based fees for administrative services. Disselkamp, et al. v. Norton Healthcare, et al. (W.D. Ky.).
- Defended four NBA teams (Spurs, Nuggets, Nets, and Pacers) that were previously members of the American Basketball Association (ABA) and the ABA Plan in a putative class action related to participant claims for breach of fiduciary duty and reporting and disclosure violations. The claims were settled on very favorable terms. Calvin, et al. v. San Antonio Spurs L.L.C., et al., (W.D. Tex.).
- Represented Dell and various individual fiduciaries of the Dell defined contribution plan in a matter involving Dell stock in the plan. The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss and affirmed its decision after the plaintiff filed an amended complaint. Camera v. Dell Inc., et al., (W.D. Tex.).
- Prevailed on a motion for summary judgment in a dispute brought by a former American Basketball Association player regarding claims for pension benefits under the American Basketball Association Players’ Retirement Plan. Gilmore v. American Basketball Association Players’ Retirement Plan (M.D. Fla.).
- Represented an American multinational finance and insurance corporation and various affiliates in a putative class action alleging ERISA breaches of fiduciary duty for a trustee-directed defined contribution plan, including excessive fees. We prevailed on partial summary judgment, defeating the plaintiffs’ prohibited transaction claims. The case settled during expert discovery. Goldenberg v. Indel Inc., (D.N.J.).
- Representing a multinational insurance and health care company in various disputes with out-of-network providers across the country claiming entitlement to benefits based on patient assignments and related counterclaims for overpayments, and billing fraud.
- Representing OptumRx in multiple consumer class actions alleging RICO, ERISA, and state consumer protection and common-law claims stemming from an alleged pricing scheme in which drug manufacturers are accused of inflating diabetes-related prescription prices to subsidize the payment of illegal kickbacks to pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs).
- Represented UnitedHealthcare in a putative ERISA class action alleging improper denial of coverage for the hepatitis C drug Harvoni. These were significant matters for United and received national attention because the cost of a Harvoni treatment regimen for a single insured is approximately $100,000.
- Convinced the court to deny class certification in a putative ERISA class action against Aetna and our client Optum. The named plaintiff contended that Aetna and Optum violated RICO and ERISA by passing off as medical expenses the administrative fees that Optum charged Aetna. The court held that the proposed class failed Rule 23’s requirements because there was no common proof of injury. Peters v. Aetna Inc., (W.D.N.C.).
- Led the defense of one of the largest actuarial consulting firms in the U.S. The city contended that Buck committed actuarial malpractice in estimating the savings from its 2012 pension reforms. The district court granted our motion for summary judgment on all counts, which the city did not appeal. The City of Providence v. Buck Consultants LLC (D.R.I.).
- Defended a major airline in a multidistrict class action lawsuit challenging the calculation of lump sum and annuity benefits under its retirement plan. This matter settled on favorable terms while our motion for summary judgment was pending. (Northern District of Georgia).
Highlights
Alston & Bird Earns 131 Tier-1 Rankings in 2026 Best Law Firms
Alston & Bird has been honored as one of the nation’s top law firms in the 2026 edition of Best Law Firms®, ranked by Best Lawyers. The firm received 30 national tier-one practice rankings and 101 metropolitan tier-one practice rankings across all U.S. offices.
Alston & Bird Elects 22 New Partners
Alston & Bird announces the election of 22 lawyers to its partnership, effective January 1, 2026. The new partners span seven offices and nine practice groups.