Columbia University targeted in $100 million lawsuit over excessive retirement plan fees

Columbia University was sued Tuesday on claims its retirement plans charged excessive fees. This follows a string of similar litigation filed over the past week against several top universities, leading to speculation that these suits are merely the first volleys in what’s likely to be a developing trend.
The plaintiff in the proposed class-action lawsuit is seeking $100 million from Columbia for losses suffered by two retirement plans and their participants due to the allegedly unreasonable investment management and record-keeping fees.
Since Aug. 9, at least eight other schools — Yale, Duke, New York University, MIT, Johns Hopkins, the University of Pennsylvania, Vanderbilt and Emory — were targeted with claims that retirement plans harmed employees through excessive fees.
With the exception of MIT, all of the suits, including the newest one against Columbia, concern university 403(b) plans, representing a new saga in a decade of excessive-fee litigation, which has until now been confined largely to the realm of 401(k) plans. 403(b) plans are 401(k)-type plans for nonprofit institutions.
The Columbia lawsuit stands out among others in the group because it was filed by the law firm Sanford Heisler, not Schlichter, Bogard & Denton, the firm responsible for the prior eight university suits, and whose managing partner, Jerry Schlichter, has been a pioneer of excessive-fee litigation against 401(k) plans.
Indeed, the Columbia lawsuit represents the first Sanford has brought in the ERISA excessive-fee realm, according to Charles Field, partner at the firm and co-chair of its financial services group.
The Columbia case raises the question of how many other firms will “jump on the bandwagon” to sue universities, said Duane Thompson, senior policy analyst at fi360 Inc., a fiduciary consulting firm.
“It looks like we’re seeing a race to the courthouse,” Mr. Thompson said. “You’d have to think the few Ivy League schools that aren’t on this list yet are combing frantically through their investment policy statements.”
Many of these retirement plan legal affairs have met with success, delivering multimillion-dollar settlements to plaintiffs and their attorneys. The largest ever was a $62 million settlement with Lockheed Martin Corp. last year.
ALLEGATIONS
The newest suit — Doe v. Columbia University et al, filed Aug. 16 in New York district court — concerns the $2.8 billion Retirement Plan for Officers of Columbia University and the $1.8 billion Voluntary Retirement Savings Plan.
The lawsuit claims the retention of multiple record keepers (Vanguard Group and TIAA) and the more than 100 investment options (the majority of which are Vanguard and TIAA funds) “diluted” plan fiduciaries’ ability to get lower pricing for plan services, according to Mr. Field, the plaintiff’s attorney.
Retention of more-expensive share-class funds when identical funds were available in lower-cost share classes also created losses over 2010 through the present day, the relevant period in the lawsuit, he claimed.
Columbia spokeswoman Caroline Adelman declined to comment on the lawsuit due to the school’s policy with respect to pending litigation, but said the university is “proud of the retirement benefits offered to its faculty and staff and takes its responsibility as a fiduciary seriously.”
COPYCAT?
Allegations are strikingly similar to those of the eight suits filed last week, making this seem “unquestionably” like a copy-cat lawsuit, according to Mr. Thompson, who said he’s never seen such a concentration of excessive-fee filings in such a short period of time.
“The only difference is the name of the firm attached to the Columbia lawsuit,” he said. “Outside of that, there are remarkable similarities in references to sources and identical counts filed in the Columbia suit.”
One difference, though, is that the named plaintiff, Jane Doe, is anonymous, which Mr. Field said is out of deference to the plaintiff’s wishes not to reveal her identity. Aside from saying the woman is a plan participant, Mr. Field declined to say whether she currently works for or is a former employee of Columbia.
Aside from allegations involving mutual fund share classes, which have met with success in prior court cases, Mr. Thompson believes many of the claims among the university suits are “novel arguments,” and he is unsure how they will play out in the courts.