Skip to main content

In re Citigroup Pension Plan Erisa Litigation

S.D.N.Y.December 19, 2006No. No. 05 Civ. 5296(SAS)Cited 16 times
Plaintiff WinCitigroup Inc.
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Scheindlin
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 plaintiffs' motion for class certification in an ERISA class action challenging Citigroup's cash balance pension plan, following an earlier summary judgment ruling in plaintiffs' favor on multiple ERISA violation claims.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened** Citigroup employees filed a lawsuit claiming their company violated federal pension laws (ERISA) when designing their cash balance pension plan. The workers argued that Citigroup's benefit calculation formula was flawed and illegally reduced their retirement benefits. They wanted the court to recognize this as a class action representing all affected plan participants. **What the Court Decided** The court ruled in favor of the employees on multiple counts. The judge granted class certification, meaning all similarly affected Citigroup pension plan participants could join together in one lawsuit. The court had already determined that Citigroup violated ERISA rules and ordered the company to reform its pension plan to fix the problems with how benefits were calculated. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling demonstrates that employees can successfully challenge their employer's pension plan designs when they violate federal law. Workers have legal protections under ERISA that ensure their retirement benefits are calculated fairly. When companies make errors in pension formulas that shortchange employees, courts can order the employer to fix the plan and make things right. This case shows the value of workers banding together in class action lawsuits to protect their retirement security.

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.