The recent $332M Colgate-Palmolive ERISA settlement is one of the largest recoveries of its kind, and a reminder of how technical plan document errors can translate into significant underpayments. In McCutcheon v. Colgate-Palmolive, plaintiffs uncovered miscalculations tied to a 2005 residual annuity amendment. The case shows how drafting inconsistencies, plan conversions, and decades of amendments can create high-value claims that aren’t apparent on the surface. It also hones in on a broader point: if one major plan carries errors of this magnitude, others likely do too. Jordan Grimmer-Tufik, Senior Litigation Specialist at Darrow AI, breaks down the settlement, the litigation path, and what it means for future benefit-plan litigation. Read the full analysis: https://lnkd.in/d4UUdTs5 #legalintelligence #erisa
