Eleventh Circuit overturns ERISA exhaustion requirement for statutory claims

Overview

Updated 2 hours ago

Plan participants in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia can now sue over mismanaged retirement plans without first exhausting their plan's internal appeals process. On October 13, the full Eleventh Circuit overruled its 1985 decision in Mason v. Continental Group, which had required administrative exhaustion for all statutory claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).

The ruling revives a proposed class action against Inland Fresh Seafood Corporation of America, whose former employees allege fiduciaries mismanaged the company's employee stock ownership plan. Plan sponsors across the three-state circuit now face faster, costlier fiduciary-breach litigation. The exhaustion defense survives only where plan documents themselves require it.

Why it matters

Plan sponsors in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia lose a key pre-suit defense, opening the door to faster fiduciary-breach lawsuits over retirement plan management.

Questions about this story

Free account needed to ask — your question is kept and asked for you right after sign-up. Answers are public.

No questions yet — be the first to ask.

Key Indicators

7-1-1

Circuit split on ERISA exhaustion

Seven federal appeals courts reject mandatory exhaustion for statutory ERISA claims; the Eleventh required it until Tuesday; one circuit's position is unclear.

41 years

Duration of Mason precedent

The judge-made exhaustion rule stood from 1985 until overruled on October 13, 2026.

Voices

Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.

Ever wondered what historical figures would say about today's headlines?

People Involved

Adalberto Jordan

U.S. Circuit Judge, Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Wrote the en banc opinion overruling Mason v. Continental Group

Organizations Involved

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Federal appeals court

Overruled its 1985 Mason precedent en banc

Federal appeals court covering Alabama, Florida, and Georgia; issued the ruling overruling Mason v. Continental Group.

U.S. Department of Labor (DOL)

Federal Agency

Filed an amicus brief urging the Eleventh Circuit to abandon the exhaustion rule

The federal agency that administers and enforces ERISA; urged the court to overrule Mason.

Inland Fresh Seafood Corporation of America

Private Company

Defendant in the Bolton class action

Seafood company that sponsored the employee pension plan at issue in the lawsuit.

Timeline

1985 October 2026

5 events Latest: Yesterday

Tap a bar to jump to that date

October 2026
En banc court overrules Mason
Latest Legal

Full court holds ERISA does not require exhaustion of statutory claims; case remanded to the panel.
Yesterday
March 2026
Labor Department urges court to abandon exhaustion rule
Statement

The DOL argued the rule "cannot be squared with ERISA, logic, or notions of fairness to the American worker."
March 25th, 2026
2025
Panel affirms exhaustion dismissal; Jordan urges en banc review
Legal

A panel reaffirmed Mason and dismissed the claims. Judge Jordan concurred, urging the full court to rehear the case.
2025
2022
Former Inland Fresh employees file class action
Legal

Five former employees sue Inland Fresh and fiduciaries over mismanagement of the employee stock ownership plan.
2022
1985
Eleventh Circuit imposes ERISA exhaustion requirement
Legal

Court required plaintiffs to exhaust internal plan procedures before suing under ERISA in Mason v. Continental Group.
1985

Scenarios

Bolton class action proceeds past the pleading stage

Likely Resolves by End of 2027

Discussed by: Law360 and Bloomberg Law noted the ruling revives the class action

The case returns to the Northern District of Georgia, where the plaintiffs' fiduciary-breach claims can move forward. The defendants may raise new defenses, but the exhaustion barrier is gone. A class certification ruling or settlement would mark the next milestone.

Supreme Court weighs the exhaustion question

Unlikely Resolves by Q2 2028

Discussed by: Gibson Dunn flagged potential appellate review given the circuit split

Inland Fresh could petition the Supreme Court for certiorari, pointing to the 7-1-1 split the Eleventh Circuit itself acknowledged. The Court grants few petitions, but a clear circuit split over a federal statute's meaning is a classic reason to take a case.

Congress amends ERISA on exhaustion

Unlikely Resolves by Q2 2028

Discussed by: The Eleventh Circuit itself doubted Congress would act

The court wrote it "very much doubt[s] that Congress would take the time necessary to amend ERISA." A congressional response could codify exhaustion or make clear it is not required. Neither is likely in a divided Congress.

Historical Context

2 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.

June 2024

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024)

The Supreme Court overruled Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council (1984), the judge-made doctrine requiring courts to defer to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes. Chevron had governed federal regulatory law for four decades.

Then

Federal agencies lost automatic deference in court over statutory interpretation.

Now

Courts now interpret ambiguous statutes textually without deferring to agency legal views.

Why this matters now

Like Mason, Chevron was a judicially created rule that endured for decades until courts concluded the statutory text did not support it. Both were overruled on textualist grounds.

April 1996

Prison Litigation Reform Act (1996)

Congress passed the Prison Litigation Reform Act, which added an explicit exhaustion requirement: prisoners must exhaust available administrative remedies before filing suit over prison conditions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or other federal law.

Then

The requirement redirected prisoner litigation toward internal grievance procedures first.

Now

The PLRA is the canonical example of Congress imposing a statutory exhaustion requirement.

Why this matters now

It shows Congress knows how to write exhaustion into a statute when it wants to. ERISA has no such language, which is the core of the Eleventh Circuit's reasoning in overruling Mason.