Skip to main content

In Re Computer Sciences Corp. Erisa Litigation

C.D. Cal.July 13, 2009No. CV 08-02398 SJO (JWJx), CV 08-02409 SJO (JWJx)Cited 14 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
S. James Otero
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

The court denied plaintiffs' partial motion for summary judgment and granted defendants' motion for summary judgment on all ERISA fiduciary duty claims related to the CSC 401(k) plan's investment in CSC stock.

What This Ruling Means

**Computer Sciences Corp. Workers Lose Retirement Plan Lawsuit** Current and former employees of Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) sued the company over how it managed their retirement plan. The workers claimed CSC made poor investment decisions by putting too much of their retirement money into CSC stock, and that the company failed to tell them important information about problems with how stock options were handled (called "backdating"). The court ruled completely in favor of CSC and against the workers. The judge granted summary judgment, meaning CSC won without needing a full trial. The court rejected all claims that CSC violated its duties as manager of the employee retirement plan. This decision matters because it shows how difficult it can be for workers to successfully challenge their employer's management of company retirement plans. Even when employees believe their employer made bad investment choices or didn't share important information, courts set a high bar for proving these violations. Workers should stay informed about their retirement plan investments and understand that legal protections for challenging employer decisions about these plans have limits. It's important to diversify retirement savings beyond just company stock when possible.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.