Richard E. Nowak

Beyond litigation, Rick actively advises clients on legislative and regulatory developments affecting their retirement and health and welfare plans and investment offerings. He also advises on every aspect of ERISA fiduciary governance, including:

• selecting and monitoring plan investments and managed accounts
• retirement and health and welfare plan service provider arrangements and disclosure requirements
• emerging areas such as private funds and alternative investments, ESG, and proxy voting
• benefit plan claims and appeals procedures

Rick also advocates before the US Department of Labor, the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), and other federal agencies with respect to federal rulemaking, sub-regulatory guidance, advisory opinions, and prohibited transaction exemptions. In addition, he represents clients in regulatory audits and investigations.

Rick has been named a Benefits/ERISA Litigation “Rising Star” and “MVP” by Law360 and a “Leading Partner” for ERISA Litigation by Legal 500. He is a prolific writer on ERISA litigation and is a frequent speaker at key industry events and conferences. He also collaborates with leading benefits trade associations and industry groups on ERISA litigation and regulatory policy, including amicus briefs and legislative and regulatory proposals to improve benefit plan administration and participant outcomes.

Early in his career, Rick served in what is now called the Special Federal Litigation Division of the City of Chicago Department of Law. There he tried cases in state and federal court defending the city and its employees against constitutional and civil rights claims.

• Successfully resolved US Department of Labor investigation into the administration of an ERISA welfare benefit plan.
• Bafford v. Northrop Grumman Corp., 994 F.3d 1020 (9th Cir. 2021). Affirming district court’s granting motion to dismiss in a class action lawsuit alleging Northrop Grumman Corporation and its benefit plan committee breached their fiduciary duties under ERISA and violated ERISA’s disclosure requirements.
• Bugielski v. AT&T Services, et al., 2:17-cv-8106 (C.D. Cal.). Granting AT&T’s motion for summary judgment in ERISA class action alleging AT&T breached its fiduciary duties and engaged in prohibited transactions in administering its 401(k) plan.
• Drake v. BBVA USA Bancshares, 2021 WL 3851974 (N.D. Al.) and Ferguson v. BBVA Compass Bancshares, 2:19-cv-01135 (N.D. Al.). Granting motions to dismiss breach of fiduciary duty claims against plan service provider retained to help select and monitor the 401(k) plan’s investment options.
• Lauderdale v. NFP Retirement, Inc., 2021 WL 3828646 (C.D. Cal.). Granting motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ breach of fiduciary duty claims challenging the selection of the 401(k) plan’s investment manager and the retention of certain of the investment manager’s proprietary funds in the plan’s investment lineup.
• Harmon v. Shell Oil Company, 3:20-cv-21 (S.D. Tex.). Granting motion to dismiss fiduciary duty and prohibited transaction claims alleging the plan’s fiduciaries improperly allowed the plan’s recordkeeper to use participant data to market retail investment products outside of the plan.
• Dean v. National Production Workers Union, 2020 WL 6894665 (N.D. Ill.). Granting motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ breach of fiduciary duty claims and dismissing separate claim that federal law required defendants to roll over the former union members’ plan assets into a different benefit plan.
• Griffin v. AT&T Umbrella Benefit Plan, 2020 WL 1185286 (E.D. Wisc.). Granting motion for summary judgment in an ERISA benefits lawsuit alleging the AT&T health plan improperly denied the plaintiff’s claims for short-term and long-term disability benefits.
• Wilcox v. Georgetown University 2019 WL 132281 (D.D.C.). Granting motion to dismiss class action lawsuit alleging that Georgetown breached its fiduciary duties by mismanaging its retirement plan.
• J.L. v. Northrop Grumman Health Plan, 2020 WL 7768126 (D. Utah). Granting motion for summary judgment in ERISA benefits lawsuit alleging Northrop Grumman and its claims administrator violated the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act by improperly denying coverage for the beneficiary’s continued stay at a mental health treatment center.
• Professional Orthopedic Associates v. Geico., 2016 WL 1338597 (D.N.J. Apr. 5, 2016). Granting motion to dismiss with prejudice for defendant finding that the medical services provider lacked standing and the individual plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies in an ERISA lawsuit for unpaid medical benefits.

Other Representative Matters

• Rychorcewicz v. Welltec, Inc., 768 Fed. App’x 252 (5th Cir. 2019). Affirming district court’s granting motion for summary judgment in a wage and hour collective action filed under the FLSA.
• In re: Diisocyanates Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 2862 (W.D. Pa.) (pending). Represented multinational corporation in multidistrict litigation alleging antitrust violations against global manufacturers of polyurethane chemicals.
• Hardy v. City of Chicago, 717 Fed. App'x 627 (7th Cir. 2018). Affirming summary judgment for defendants in a matter alleging due process violations with respect to the City's and former Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy's handling of the sergeant promotion process.
• Doyle v. City of Chicago, 871 F.3d 540 (7th Cir. 2017). Affirming jury verdict and judgment as a matter of law in favor of defendants in a highly publicized lawsuit alleging political and racial discrimination with respect to the selection of Mayor Rahm Emanuel's personal security detail.
• State of Illinois Department of Human Rights (Nov. 13, 2020). Obtained dismissal of all charges brought by a former employee alleging harassment, retaliation, and constructive discharge against a large financial institution and six managers and executive-level employees.
• FinishMaster, Inc. v. BASF Corp., 1:18-cv-00970 (S.D. Ind. 2018). Obtained a favorable resolution for our client in a commercial dispute relating to the parties’ nationwide distribution relationship.
• In re: Rust-Oleum Restore Mktg., Sales Practices and Prods. Liab. Litig., MDL No. 2602 (N.D. Ill. 2017). Obtained a favorable resolution for our client in multidistrict class action litigation alleging violations of consumer and warranty laws.
• Grayer v. Ford Consumer Finance, 14-cv-10187, 14-cv-1765 (N.D. Ill. 2015). Granting motions to dismiss with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction in lawsuit consumer fraud, tax fraud, and other common law claims relating to handling of the plaintiff's mortgage loan.
• Langan v. The Big Ten Conference, Inc., 13-L-9828 (Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, 2014). Granting motions to dismiss and for summary judgment as to all claims in six-count lawsuit by a former football official alleging defamation, breach of contract and tort claims.
• Lattas v. ING Bank, 12-CH-18897 (Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, 2013). Granting motion to dismiss with prejudice as to all claims in a class action lawsuit alleging that its mortgage refinancing practices violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act.
• Austin v. CitiMortgage, 10-cv-13185 (E.D. Mich. 2012). Granting motion to dismiss with prejudice community organization plaintiff's claims for lack of standing in action alleging that CitiMortgage's mortgage refinance practices were discriminatory and violated the Fair Housing Act, Civil Rights Act, and the Consumer Credit Protection Act.
• Davis v. City of Chicago, 07-L-7680, affirmed 2014 IL App (1st) 122427. Affirming jury verdict in favor of defendants in wrongful death lawsuit alleging that police-involved shooting was an unjustified homicide.
• Johnson v. City of Chicago, 09-cv-1614 (N.D. Ill. 2011). Jury verdict in favor of defendants in federal lawsuit alleging violations of the plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights.
• Dishman v. City of Chicago, 07-cv-5626 (N.D. Ill. 2011). Jury verdict in favor of defendants in federal lawsuit alleging excessive force and violations of the plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights.
• White v. City of Chicago, 07-cv-2539 (N.D. Ill. 2011). Jury verdict in favor of defendants in federal lawsuit alleging excessive force and violations of the plaintiff's Fourth Amendment rights.