Laurent v. PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP, et al., 06-2880 (GBD) (S.D.N.Y.)

This case challenges the design and operation of PricewaterhouseCoopers (“PwC”)’s cash balance plan, known as Retirement Benefit Accumulation Plan for Employees of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (or “RBAP”).

Like the Firm’s Bank of America action, this is a “whipsaw” case, arguing that participants were short-changed when they requested lump sum distributions of their plan benefits. Former Judge Michael Mukasey (now Attorney General) agreed with us that the RBAP’s definition of “normal retirement age” was illegal. You can read his ruling of September 5, 2006 here. Following Judge Mukasey’s retirement from the bench, the case was reassigned to the Honorable George B. Daniels, who denied PwC’ motion for reconsideration on August 17, 2007. You can read his ruling here. PwC’s subsequent petition to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals for review of these pro-participant rulings was recently denied (in a one-sentence order) and thus the case will be continuing to the next phase.

Current and former participants in the RBAP are encouraged to contact us to provide us with information about their individual circumstances or understand the case in more detail.