Ian Taylor

/My focus

I focus my practice on ERISA litigation. With broad experience in this area, I help defend plans, fiduciaries, and companies against claims of breach of fiduciary duty, vesting and funding violation disputes, withdrawal liability disputes, and disputes regarding welfare and pension benefits. I also counsel companies on plan interpretation, amendment, and benefit claims administration. I have first and second-chair experience in litigation involving class actions, non-compete agreements, and executive compensation arrangements. I evaluate and defend liability claims under complex legacy benefit programs and litigate complex business cases.

My experience spans a wide range of industries, and I regularly represent employers in litigation in state and federal courts and before state and federal administrative agencies. My experience allows me to counsel employers regarding their obligations and potential exposure under the state and federal employment statutes.

/Representative experience

The below representative experience includes representations from a prior firm.

• Kistler, et al. v. Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. (D. Conn.). Defending Stanley Black & Decker, Inc. against ERISA breach of fiduciary duty putative class action.
• Baker, et al. v. The University of Vermont Medical Center, Inc. (D. Vt.).  Defending against ERISA breach of fiduciary duty putative class action.
• Brookings, et al. v. Northeastern University (D. Mass). Defending Northeastern University against ERISA breach of fiduciary duty putative class action.
• Gotta v. Stantec Consulting Services, Inc. et al., (D. Ariz). Defending against ERISA breach of fiduciary duty class action asserting claims for “excessive fees” and “imprudent investments.”
• Sacerdote, et al. v. New York University, et al, (S.D.N.Y.). Defending against ERISA breach of fiduciary duty class action.
• Represented one of the largest private universities in an eight-day trial in the Southern District of New York in a case alleging breaches of ERISA fiduciary duties; obtained a defense judgment on all counts.
• Obtained dismissal of a putative ERISA class action brought in the Southern District of New York.
• Obtained dismissal of a putative ERISA class action regarding allegedly defective COBRA notices.
• Represented U.S. Steel in a putative class action in the Court of Common Pleas, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania.
• Obtained denial of class certification on behalf of Marriott International, Inc. in putative ERISA class action.
• Obtained dismissal with prejudice of a putative ERISA class action on behalf of a global telecommunications company.
• Obtained partial dismissal on behalf of a consulting company.
• Represented a plan committee of a publicly traded company in connection with claims of breach of fiduciary duty relating to employer stock.
• Represented a global biotechnology tools company in an American Arbitration Association (AAA) proceeding regarding executive benefits.
• Represented a privately owned investment manager in relation to withdrawals from multiemployer plans.
• Represented MGM Mirage and Mandalay Resort Group in four cases involving termination of a supplemental executive retirement plan.
• Represented Whirlpool Corporation in litigation regarding disability pension plan claims.
• Represented Global Health Services and related insured and self-funded life and accident, medical, and disability plans in more than 50 cases in state and federal courts.

Clerkships

• United States District Court for the District of Maryland, The Honorable Jillyn K. Schulze

/Looking ahead

Courts continue to lower the bar for plaintiffs’ lawyers to avoid dismissal of putative ERISA class actions. Further, plaintiffs’ lawyers continue to test novel theories regarding ERISA’s fiduciary duties of prudence and loyalty. I expect the trend of ERISA class action filings will continue and possibly increase over the next few years.

/Insights

• “Top Five 401(k) Plan Administration Issues That Are Litigated in ERISA Class Actions,” Nixon Peabody 2023 California MCLE Virtual Seminar, January 19, 2023
• “Abrogation of The Jury’s Traditional Role in Determining Punitive Damages,” 58 Maryland Law Review, 1067