Lewandowski v. J&J dismissed for lack of redressability

Last week, two of Ann Lewandowski’s three complaints against Johnson & Johnson were dismissed for lack of redressability.

This case, like so many ERISA cases, lives and dies on standing. In order to get to the merits of a case, a plaintiff must have:

1. An injury in fact that is concrete, non-hypothetical, particularized, and actual or imminent;
2. That was caused by the defendant;
3. That would be redressable by judicial relief.

Judge Quraishi found that the claims were not likely to be remedied by the court because Ms. Lewandowski would have hit her MOOP anyway.

Had Ms. Lewandowski only had one claim for one overpriced drug that plausibly came in under the MOOP of managed appropriately, the claim could have proceeded.

It’s important to advisors and plan sponsors to understand that J&J didn’t prevail on the facts of their plan operation, but rather that the court found the case to be brought by the wrong plaintiff.

Rosa Parks wasn’t just on the bus on that famous day, she was on that bus for the specific purpose of becoming a plaintiff that would bring a perfect case to challenge segregated seating on buses.

Even if Ms. Lewandowski’s fiduciary duties claims end here, I believe there will be additional plaintiffs pursuing clarity in the law here and plan sponsors should govern themselves accordingly.