Article On Substantive Equity Under ERISA

James F. Parker (Washington & Lee School of Law) recently published an article entitled, Revival of substantive equity: increased household risk, safety valve litigation, and availability of the ERISA stock drop jury, 21 Wash. & Lee J. C.R. & Soc. Just. 425-470 (2015). Provided below is an excerpt from the article:

This Note’s examination begins with a review of the social justice concerns that underpin the modern ERISA system and a brief study of the common law of trusts, which together facilitate the Note’s first conclusion — trust law is fundamental to the foundation of the ERISA remedial regime. This Note will next examine the line of Supreme Court cases that courts use to determine whether a claim is equitable or legal for purposes of the Seventh Amendment and ERISA. Third, our case study begins with a summary of Hellman v. Cataldo, in which a Missouri district court found that the 401(k) pension plan beneficiary plaintiff was constitutionally entitled to a jury trial. Finally, after examining the District Court’s reasoning in Hellman, this Note will examine several important questions that emerge from the opinion’s reasoning and ultimately conclude that, despite ERISA’s social injustice origins, no constitutional jury trial right exists for pension plan participants bringing section 502(a)(2) stock drop class actions.