Contact Us for More Information

U.S. Supreme Court Denies Certiorari on Petition Requesting Review of Enforceability of Forum Selection Clauses In ERISA-Governed Benefit Plans

Posted by Corey F. Schechter | Feb 23, 2017 | 0 Comments

On January 17, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States declined to decide the issue of whether forum selection clauses contained in ERISA benefit plans are enforceable when it denied Certiorari in Clause v. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 719 (Jan.17, 2017). 

The Supreme Court's denial of Certiorari in Clause allows to stand an 8th Circuit decision upholding the enforceability of a forum selection clause contained in a benefit plan governed by ERISA which required the plan participant to litigate her claims in a particular forum. ERISA itself provides that a participant or beneficiary may bring a claim for benefits, “in the district where the plan is administered, where the breach took place, or where a defendant resides or may be found.” 29 U.S.C. § 1132(e)(2). Forum selection clauses in ERISA plans typically limit where such claims may be brought to where the plan is administered. Proponents of such clauses generally argue that limiting the forum in which a claim may be brought allows for some degree of uniformity in how claims will be handled, while opponents of such clauses generally state that they impose an increased burden on the claimant by requiring them to litigate in a distant forum.

While the only two U.S. appellate courts to rule on the issue of forum selection clause enforceability as it relates to ERISA benefit plans (i.e., the 6th and 8th Circuits) have upheld their validity, it is worth noting that several U.S. district courts within other circuits have found these clauses unenforceable (typically on grounds of public policy, as well as contradicting ERISA's own choice of forum clause contained at 29 U.S.C. § 1132(e)(2). Perhaps a split of opinion among the circuits is what the Supreme Court is looking for before it will decide to take on the issue itself; however, given the rising use of forum selection clauses in ERISA-governed benefit plans, it is likely only a matter of time before that occurs.

It must be remembered that denial of Certiorari by the Supreme Court is of no precedential value. Therefore, while forum selection clauses within ERISA-governed benefit plans may continue to be enforced in the 6th and 8th Circuits, other circuits are still free to adopt the opinion that such clauses are invalid and thus unenforceable. Check back periodically on our discussion page for continuing coverage of this issue as it becomes available.

If you have exhausted your internal administrative appeals and are filing or intend to file a claim for benefits in court under your benefit plan and your benefit plan contains a forum selection clause, contact us today for advice regarding your ability to file the claim in your forum of choice. Butterfield Schechter LLP is San Diego's largest law firm focusing its practice on ERISA and employee benefits law.

About the Author

Corey F. Schechter

Corey Schechter practices in the areas of Employee Benefits, Employee Stock Ownership Plans, Pension and Profit Sharing Plans, ERISA, ERISA Litigation, Business Law, Qualified Domestic Relations Orders (QDROs), and Employment and Labor Law.


There are no comments for this post. Be the first and Add your Comment below.

Leave a Comment

Retirement Plans

We help establish a customized plan that meets regulatory requirements as a tax qualified plan. Following implementation, our attorneys can assist clients and their plan administrator with regular reviews and updates to help with regulatory compliance for the plan's operation, and continued effectiveness in meeting the client's specific goals.


We are dedicated to employee ownership. When you come to us for ESOP services, you receive influential legal counsel who stand beside you to help you stay informed, in compliance, and abreast of the latest developments-all to help you realize your plan goals as fully and effectively as possible.


A QDRO is a specially designed court order that is required for the division of retirement benefits in a family law case. Many family law attorneys do not possess the expertise necessary to divide retirement benefits or stock options upon divorce. We have extensive experience in dividing qualified plans, government plans, IRAs and stock options between the employee spouse and non-employee spouse.

Butterfield Schechter LLP provides the information in this website as a service to its clients and visitors to the site. This website is for information purposes only and is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. The information in this website is provided "as is," and while the information in this website is updated periodically, additional facts or future developments may affect subjects contained herein, and no guarantee is given that the information provided is correct, complete, or up-to-date. Seek the advice of professional counsel before acting or relying upon any article, form, or information in this web site. To ensure compliance with the requirements imposed by the United States Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service, we inform you that any federal tax advice contained in this communication is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of: (1) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or (2) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another person any transaction or matter addressed herein. Butterfield Schechter LLP has endeavored to comply with all known legal and ethical requirements in compiling this website. In the event that this communication does not conform with any laws or regulations of any state or country in which it may be received, Butterfield Schechter LLP will not accept legal representation based on this communication from a person in such a state or country. Electronic mail is provided as a convenience in communicating with the attorneys at Butterfield Schechter LLP. Contact by e-mail does not alone create an attorney-client relationship. Please remember Internet e-mail is not secure and messages sent to the firm or any of its employees or attorneys should not contain sensitive or confidential information. Thank you for visiting our site.