Case Explained: KLAWONN V. BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR THE MOTION PICTURE INDUSTRY PENSION PLANS, ET AL.

Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Filed: 2026-08-14 Docket: 2:20-cv-09194-DMG-AS The Ninth Circuit vacated the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the defendants on Klawonn’s ERISA claim for breach of the fiduciary duty of prudence and remanded the case for further proceedings. The court held that the district court applied an incorrect legal standard by requiring underperformance to be “both substantial and consistent” to support a claim of imprudence, failing to apply the prospective evaluation of methods employed by fiduciaries clarified in *Anderson v. Intel Corp. Inv. Pol’y Comm.*, 137 F.4th 1015 (9th Cir. 2025). Additionally, the district court erred in its definition of recoverable loss; under 29 U.S.C. § 1109(a), fiduciaries are liable for “any loss” to the plan resulting from a breach, not merely “substantial loss.” Regarding the class certification and standing issues, the court affirmed that the district court did not abuse its discretion in initially certifying the class when Klawonn had sufficient intent to return to work. However, the court found that Klawonn’s individual claim for prospective relief became moot by the time of summary judgment due to her continued unemployment and decision to cash out of the plan. Despite this individual mootness, the class action remains viable because the class was properly certified before the claim became moot. Consequently, on remand, the district court must determine whether a substitute class representative is available to continue the litigation. Do It For The Case Law is a news reporting service. Nothing in this episode constitutes legal advice.