Overview
This lawsuit, Scott, et al. v. AT&T Inc., Case No. 3:20-cv-070904-JD, United States District Court of the Northern District of California, filed on October 12, 2020, is brought on behalf of a class of participants and beneficiaries in the AT&T Pension Benefit Plan (AT&T Plan). Plaintiffs allege that defendants AT&T Inc. and AT&T Services violated the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Through these violations, plaintiffs allege that they were deprived of accrued, vested pension benefits when they receive their pension benefit in the form of a Joint and Survivor Annuity, the default form of benefit for married participants. The lawsuit alleges this has resulted in AT&T Plan participants and beneficiaries receiving less than the actuarial equivalent of their vested accrued benefit, contrary to ERISA’s requirements. This lawsuit seeks to recover amounts due to members of the class, and to amend the AT&T Plan to fully comply with protections afforded by ERISA to defined benefit pension plan participants and beneficiaries.
Scott v. AT&T Inc. et al does not challenge AT&T’s lump sum calculations. Scott v. AT&T Inc. is distinct from a prior lawsuit, Eliason v. AT&T, Inc., which asserted similar claims involving the AT&T Plan’s lump sum computations. On September 28, 2020, Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim dismissed Eliason v. AT&T Inc. on procedural grounds.
Class Action Allegations
This lawsuit is brought on behalf of three proposed classes of people.
- The Injunction/Equitable Relief Class includes all AT&T Plan participants and their beneficiaries, excluding those participants and beneficiaries in the Mobility Program, the Mobility Bargained Program, and the DIRECTV Program, who are receiving a Joint and Survivor Annuity calculated pursuant to tabular factors set forth in the Plan, or who would receive a Joint and Survivor Annuity calculated pursuant to tabular factors set forth in the Plan upon electing a Joint and Survivor Annuity.
- The Retired SubClass includes all AT&T Plan participants and their beneficiaries who are receiving a Joint and Survivor Annuity that is less than the value of their Single Life Annuity when converted to a Joint and Survivor Annuity using the interest rates and mortality tables set forth in 26 U.S.C. § 417(e), excluding those participants and beneficiaries in the Mobility Program, the Mobility Bargained Program, and the DIRECTV Program.
- The Pre-Retirement SubClass includes all AT&T Plan participants and their beneficiaries who have not commenced receiving benefits, excluding those participants and beneficiaries in the Mobility Program, the Mobility Bargained Program, and the DIRECTV Program.
Excluded from the proposed classes are defendants and members of their immediate families or any of their heirs, successors, or assigns.
Status of the Litigation
- Plaintiffs’ counsel initiated Scott v. AT&T Inc. et al., on October 12, 2020 in the United States District Court of the Northern District of California. The case was assigned to District Judge James Donato. On January 1, 2021, plaintiffs amended their complaint and narrowed their dispute to the Joint and Survivor Annuities provided by the AT&T Plan.
- Defendants moved to transfer the case to Texas or dismiss the case outright. On April 8, 2021, after reviewing the parties’ written and oral argument, Judge Donato denied defendants’ motions in their entirety and permitted the case to proceed in California.
- On October 5, 2021, Judge Donato granted plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a second amended complaint which added several new named plaintiffs. Plaintiffs filed the second amended complaint with the Court on October 7, 2021. Defendants again moved to dismiss the case, and, on June 29, 2022, Judge Donato again denied defendants’ motion.
- On June 6, 2022, plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification, which defendants opposed. After the motion was fully briefed, the Court vacated the October 27, 2022 hearing and stayed the case until January 17, 2023 to allow the parties to engage in settlement negotiations. The parties did not reach a settlement during a December 22, 2022 mediation. On September 26, 2023, the Court directed the parties to file supplemental briefs related to plaintiffs’ motion for class certification by October 27, 2023.
- Plaintiffs subsequently filed their motion for leave to file a third amended complaint and substitute class representatives for the Pre-Retirement Class on March 23, 2025. Judge Donato granted the motion on March 28, 2024. Plaintiffs filed the third amended complaint on March 29, 2024.
- On March 9, 2023, defendants moved for summary judgment on most of plaintiffs’ claims and moved to exclude the testimony of plaintiffs’ experts. Plaintiffs opposed both motions. Subsequently, on July 16, 2024, the Court set a concurrent expert evidence proceeding for October 10, 2024 related to defendants’ motion to exclude the opinions of expert Ian Altman and plaintiffs’ motion to certify a class. The hearing was continued to January 8, 2025. On October 25, 2024, the Court issued a briefing schedule permitting parties to file supplemental briefing on plaintiffs’ class certification motion and defendants’ summary judgment motion.
- At the January 8, 2025 concurrent expert evidentiary hearing the Court directed the parties to provide further class certification briefing, and the experts were to discuss the disputed issues and produce supplemental expert reports; all of which are to conclude by April 11, 2025.
- Presently, plaintiffs’ motion for class certification, and defendants’ motions for summary judgment and to strike plaintiffs’ expert are pending.
Whom to Contact for More Information
If you are a member of the proposed class or have information which might assist us in the prosecution of these allegations, please contact one of the following persons:
Michelle C. Yau (email)
Daniel R. Sutter (email)
Caroline E. Bressman (email)
Sydney Greenman, Paralegal (email)
Liz Luebesmier, Paralegal (email)
Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC
1100 New York Avenue, N.W., Suite 800
Washington, D.C. 20005