Skip to main content

In Re Consolidated Welfare Fund ERISA Litigation

S.D.N.Y.December 20, 1993No. MDL No. 902, No. 91 Civ. 4031 (MP)
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Milton Pollack
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment

Related Laws

erisa

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

Court granted partial summary judgment to the Department of Labor, finding that Goldstein, a trustee of an ERISA-governed employee welfare benefit plan, violated the fiduciary duty provisions of ERISA Section 406(b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3) through self-dealing with plan assets via his wholly-owned brokerage companies.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened** This case involved Burton Goldstein, who served as a trustee for the Consolidated Local 867 Health and Welfare Fund - a benefit plan that provides healthcare and other benefits to union workers. The Department of Labor accused Goldstein of breaking federal laws that protect employee benefit plans. Specifically, they claimed he was using his position as trustee to benefit himself financially by directing plan money to companies he owned, which then received commissions from those transactions. **What the Court Decided** The court ruled in favor of the Department of Labor, finding Goldstein guilty of violating his fiduciary duties. The judge determined that Goldstein engaged in "self-dealing" - essentially using his trustee position to enrich himself rather than acting in the best interests of the plan participants. The court found he improperly received compensation through his ownership of companies that profited from plan assets. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling reinforces important protections for workers' benefit plans. It shows that people managing employee benefit funds must put workers' interests first, not their own financial gain. When trustees violate these rules, courts will hold them accountable, helping ensure workers' retirement and healthcare benefits remain secure.

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.