Providing valuable counsel to employers and employees.

Sutkowski attorneys represent employers, fiduciaries, boards of directors, benefit plans, and plan administrators in all aspects of ERISA litigation.
Carle Foundation Hospital v. American United Life Insurance Co.
Carle Hospital participated in an AUL group annuity contract sponsored by the Illinois Hospital Association. At termination, AUL imposed “surrender charge” of nearly 6% of…
Learn More

Carle Foundation Hospital v. American United Life Insurance Co.

Carle Hospital participated in an AUL group annuity contract sponsored by the Illinois Hospital Association. At termination, AUL imposed “surrender charge” of nearly 6% of the reported contract value. Pursued ERISA fiduciary action to recover “surrender charge,” understated “investment liquidation adjustment” and discretionary interest margin retained by AUL at contract termination.

Children’s Home Association of Illinois v. Mutual of America Life Ins. Co.
Children’s Home participated in Mutual of America group annuity contract. Mutual of America maintained some funds in interest-bearing general account, when it had the authority…
Learn More

Children’s Home Association of Illinois v. Mutual of America Life Ins. Co.

Children’s Home participated in Mutual of America group annuity contract. Mutual of America maintained some funds in interest-bearing general account, when it had the authority to invest plan assets in any mutual fund. Pursued ERISA fiduciary action to recover discretionary interest margin and profits retained by AUL.

Coleman Clinic, Ltd. v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins. Co.
Coleman adopted Mass Mutual’s prototype plan designed to invest in cash-value insurance policies. When Coleman decided to terminate the plan, Mass Mutual failed to act…
Learn More

Coleman Clinic, Ltd. v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins. Co.

Coleman adopted Mass Mutual’s prototype plan designed to invest in cash-value insurance policies. When Coleman decided to terminate the plan, Mass Mutual failed to act before an additional year of benefits accrued under the plan. Pursued ERISA fiduciary claims to recover cost of the additional benefits accrued and the loss upon surrender of the cash-value insurance policies.

Farm King Supply, Inc. Integrated Profit Sharing Plan and Trust v. Edward D. Jones & Co.
Brokerage firm made presentations to plan trustees recapping performance of investments, advising the trustees which investments to hold and which to sell Brokerage firm made…
Learn More

Farm King Supply, Inc. Integrated Profit Sharing Plan and Trust v. Edward D. Jones & Co.

Brokerage firm made presentations to plan trustees recapping performance of investments, advising the trustees which investments to hold and which to sell Brokerage firm made presentations to plan trustees recapping performance of investments, advising the trustees which investments to hold and which to sell, and offering the trustees a choice of recommended investments. Plan lost 30% of funds invested in securities recommended by brokerage firm. Pursued ERISA fiduciary action against brokerage firm to recover losses.

Jefferson Trust and Savings Bank of Peoria v. Simmons
Defendants controlled Keystone Consolidated Industries and its pension plans, and were seeking to purchase control of Amalgamated Sugar Company. After a competing offer was made…
Learn More

Jefferson Trust and Savings Bank of Peoria v. Simmons

Defendants controlled Keystone Consolidated Industries and its pension plans, and were seeking to purchase control of Amalgamated Sugar Company. After a competing offer was made for Amalgamated, defendants ordered that millions of dollars of stocks owned by Keystone pension funds be sold immediately and the proceeds used by the pension funds to purchase Amalgamated shares. Pursued ERISA fiduciary action to protect pension fund. Secretary of Labor filed companion suit.

Jerome Mirza & Associates, Ltd. v. United States
Jerome Mirza adopted a defined benefit pension plan. The plan actuary determined the plan’s normal cost using an interest rate assumption of 5%. Internal Revenue…
Learn More

Jerome Mirza & Associates, Ltd. v. United States

Jerome Mirza adopted a defined benefit pension plan. The plan actuary determined the plan’s normal cost using an interest rate assumption of 5%. Internal Revenue Service contested actual assumptions. Pursued tax refund on theory of first impression that actuary was an ERISA fiduciary in setting the plan’s actuarial assumptions and methodology.