Litigation schedule set for suits against DOL fiduciary rule

The plaintiffs and Labor Department are seeking summary judgment for the cases in a Dallas federal court, with a decision possible in October

Jun 27, 2016 @ 4:31 pm

By Mark Schoeff Jr.

Financial industry trade groups and the Department of Labor have agreed to a litigation schedule that could render a decision in October on several lawsuits seeking to stop an investment advice regulation.

The plaintiffs and the DOL are seeking summary judgment for the cases in a Dallas federal court. Briefs would be filed at various dates in July, August, September and into the middle of October.

“The parties agree that the cases should be decided expeditiously on cross-motions for summary judgment without discovery or any other evidentiary proceedings,” a June 24 joint motion states.

The plaintiffs' opinion continued: “There is good cause for the expeditious resolution of this litigation. Among other things, plaintiffs and/or many of their members will incur significant costs and challenges in endeavoring to comply with the Department's rulemaking by April 2017 (the applicability date for most provisions of the rule).”

(More: Everything you need to know about the DOL fiduciary rule as it develops)

Chief Judge Barbara M.G. Lynn has not yet ruled on the motion.

In a separate order on June 21, Ms. Lynn consolidated three suits that were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.

One of them involves nine co-plaintiffs, including the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, the Financial Services Institute and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Another one was filed by the American Council of Life Insurers and the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors. A third was filed by the Indexed Annuity Leadership Council.

Two other suits are also in the court system. One was filed in the Washington, D.C., federal court by the National Association of Fixed Annuities. The other was filed in the Kansas district court by Market Synergy Group.A hearing on summary judgment in the NAFA litigation has been set for Aug. 25.

Each of the suits aims to kill the DOL rule, which was finalized in April and requires financial advisers to act in the best interests of their clients in retirement accounts.

The plaintiffs argue the rule would significantly raise regulatory costs and legal risks for financial advisers and make advice too expensive for investors with modest assets.

The Obama administration asserts that the rule will protect workers and retirees from conflicted advice that results in the sale of high-fee investments that erode savings.

In a June 22 appearance at the National Press Club in Washington, Labor Secretary Thomas Perez expressed confidence that the regulation will withstand the court challenges.

(Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that Judge Lynn had already granted the joint motion.)


What do you think?

View comments

Recommended for you

Featured video


WisdomTree's Maute: Developing elegant tech-enabled solutions

Advisers need unique technology-enabled solutions in order to have more time to expand their practice, according to WisdomTree's Alisa Maute. What can be done today to create a more thriving business of tomorrow.

Latest news & opinion

Meet our 2017 Women to Watch

Introducing 20 female financial advisers and industry executives who are distinguished leaders, advancing the business of providing advice through their creativity and hard work.

Raymond James executives call on industry to keep broker protocol

Also ask firms to pay for the administration of the protocol to 'ensure its longevity and relevance.'

Senate committee approves tax plan but full passage not assured

Several Republican senators expressed reservations about the bill, and the GOP cannot afford too many defections.

House passes tax bill, focus turns to Senate

Tax reform legislation expected to have more of a challenge in upper chamber.

SEC enforcement of advisers drops in Trump era

The agency pursued 82 cases against advisers and firms in fiscal year 2017, down from 98 the previous year.


Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print