Kent Mason Quoted in Planadviser.com Article on District Court’s Pension Risk Transfer Litigation Ruling
- Published Date: October 5, 2026
On September 29, 2026, Planadviser.com published an article titled, “Federal Judge Dismisses PRT Claims Against AT&T, Lets Case Against State Street Proceed,” where Davis & Harman partner, Kent Mason, was quoted discussing a partial dismissal in Piercy et al. v. AT&T Inc.
On September 28, 2026, the Massachusetts district court judge presiding over the case followed the magistrate judge’s recommendations to dismiss claims against AT&T on the grounds that plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that AT&T was involved in selection of Athene as the annuity provider in a pension risk transfer transaction. The district court judge, however, did not dismiss the claims against State Street, who served as the independent fiduciary in the pension risk transfer transaction.
Mason is quoted saying, “What the AT&T case said is, ‘AT&T did not have knowledge of the alleged breach in choosing Athene, and they didn’t participate in the selection of it; they outsourced that,’. . . [s]o they didn’t have knowledge, they didn’t participate. Therefore, they don’t have liability.”
Mason further stated that the district court should have also dismissed the claims against State Street. He is quoted saying that “[t]he decision to deny the motion to dismiss the suit altogether was just wrong, . . . Unlike almost all the other judges in PRT cases, the magistrate and the judge incorrectly found that the Supreme Court decision in Thole v. U.S. Bank did not apply and thus plaintiffs had standing based on the very speculative possibility of future harm. Second, the magistrate and judge allowed the suit to move forward based on comparisons of Athene to other insurers that they admit may not be valid comparators. This approach makes the motion to dismiss almost illusory.”
The full article can be found here.
