Photo of Stephen Rosenberg

Stephen has chaired the ERISA and insurance coverage/bad faith litigation practices at two Boston firms, and has practiced extensively in commercial litigation for nearly 30 years. As head of the Wagner Law Group's ERISA litigation practice, he represents plan sponsors, plan fiduciaries, financial advisors, plan participants, company executives, third-party administrators, employers and others in a broad range of ERISA disputes, including breach of fiduciary duty, denial of benefit, Employee Stock Ownership Plan and deferred compensation matters.

Fred Reish has an excellent article out on the technical and substantive aspects of the executive – and soon to be regulatory – efforts to open 401(k) plans to alternative investments, with a particular focus on the targeting (pun intended) of target date funds as the channel for bringing them into the investment holdings of

Insurance coverage lawyer Geoffrey Fehling had a great LinkedIn post concerning a Massachusetts court dismissing class action claims against Liberty Mutual because of the failure of plaintiffs’ counsel to identify and then name the correct Liberty Mutual affiliated insurance companies as defendants. I wanted to add three points to it which, in their absence, could

In earlier posts in my Plan Sponsor and Fiduciary 2.0 series I promised to provide a cheat sheet for fiduciaries confronting the push to add private equity and other alternative assets to 401(k) plans.  Here it is, with a focus on private equity assets, because that is where most of the initial action currently is

Many commentators are suggesting that the recent executive order and the directive for regulatory action towards adding private equity and other alternative assets to 401(k) plans does not mean that those assets are destined to end up in 401(k) plans. But personally, I think that belief is almost certainly naïve – particularly with regard to

This is the third in my series of posts called Plan Sponsor and Fiduciary 2.0, which addresses how fiduciaries and plan sponsors should now be conducting themselves in light of operational changes, legal developments, and liability risks that have developed over the past ten to fifteen years. You can find the origin story behind this

The big story in retirement investing is now the Trump administration’s push to have private equity investments added into 401(k) plans. This isn’t really a new story, as I have been writing about it since at least last November, but the intensity – as well as the media coverage – has now ramped up.

One of the themes I have returned to time and again with regard to excessive fee and other class action litigation under ERISA is that the traditional litigation approach deployed for years by the plan sponsor community needs to be updated. With some variation, it has followed the traditional defense model typically used in class

This is a very nice, well-balanced article by Kellie Mejdrich of Law360 on the question of adding private equity investments into 401(k) plans. I am quoted in it not so much as a naysayer on the idea, but more on the need for a little bit of skepticism and caution on the idea. To be

Walk softly and carry a big stick. Trust but verify. Never bring a knife to a gunfight.

People who know me, have read my blog regularly, heard me speak on ERISA issues, or been on a jury in a case I have tried, know that I am very fond of analogies, metaphors, short examples, and

I have long been inordinately fond of the Dickens’ line “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.” It is applicable to many things at many times, and I have used it in briefs, slide decks, presentations, and conversations. But at this point in time, for plan sponsors and plan fiduciaries