- Class Actions and Complex Litigation
- Employee Benefits
- Energy and Utilities
- Financial Services
- Gaming and Hospitality
- Health Care
- Public Sector
|University ||South Carolina Honors College, B.A., 1983|
|Law School||University of South Carolina, J.D., 1987|
|Admitted||1998, U.S. Supreme Court; 2001, Tennessee - E.D. Tenn.; 2010, 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals; 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals; 1989, 4th Circuit Court of Appeals; 2005, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals; 1995, 6th Circuit Court of Appeals; 1998, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals; 2005, 8th Circuit Court of Appeals; 2006, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals; 2002, 10th Circuit Court of Appeals; 1998, 11th Circuit Court of Appeals; U.S. Court of Appeals; 2007, Connecticut - D. Conn.; 2005, Illinois - N.D. Ill.; 2006, Indiana - N.D. Ind.; 2006, Indiana - S.D. Ind.; 1988, South Carolina - D. S.C.; 1987, South Carolina; 2006, 1st Circuit Court of Appeals|
Professional Associations and Activities
•American Bar Association, Subcommittee co-chair of Employee Benefits Committee
•South Carolina Bar
Ashley B. Abel is a Shareholder in the Greenville, South Carolina, office of Jackson Lewis P.C. He has over 20 years of experience as lead counsel in single plaintiff, multi-plaintiff, and class-action employment and employee benefits litigation.
Mr. Abel is actively involved in defending employers, benefit plans and plan fiduciaries against ERISA lawsuits alleging breaches of fiduciary duty involving ESOP transactions, as well as audits and agency investigations related to ESOPs and related trusts. Mr. Abel has appeared as lead counsel in over 25 states and in all United States Courts of Appeal.
Mr. Abel is a Certified Specialist in Employment and Labor Law by the South Carolina Supreme Court. He is frequently called on to speak to companies and industry audiences in the areas of employee benefits and employment law.
Honors and Recognitions
•The Legal 500 Ashley B. Abel
•“Employment Discrimination and Employee Benefits,” Chapter 15 of Employee Benefits Law (BNA) [Co-Author]
•ERISA Litigation, Class Actions Chapter (BNA) [Co-Author]
Speeches and Presentations
•“The Affordable Care Act (What Employers Need to Know) and ERISA Fiduciary Update,” BMW Manufacturing Corp. Annual Conference (Greenville, SC, Nov. 7, 2013)
•“Retaliation, Interference and Employee Benefits,” American Law Institute (Webcast, March 21, 2013)
•“The State of Employee Benefits in 2012,“ Association of Corporate Counsel (Webcast, May 17, 2012)
•“ERISA Fiduciary Litigation: The Newest Developments in Plaintiff's Theories and Substantive Defenses,” American Conference Institute, Annual ERISA Litigation Conference (New York, Oct. 2010)
•“Protecting Benefit Plans,” 20th Annual Corporate Counsel Conference (Washington, D.C., May 2010)
•“Retiree Health Benefit Litigation,” American Conference Institute, Annual ERISA Litigation Conference (New York, Oct. 2009)
February 5, 2014
Supreme Court Affirms Contractually Reduced Limitations Periods for ERISA Benefit Claims
February 5, 2014
A contractual limitations period in an ERISA disability benefits plan that required participants to bring suit within three years after “proof of loss is due” is enforceable, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled unanimously. Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co. et al., 134 S.Ct. 604, 187 L. Ed. 2d 529 (2013)....
In the News
May 19, 2015 Chambers & Partners
Jackson Lewis Attorneys Ranked in 2015 Chambers USA Guide
May 19, 2015
WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. (May 19, 2015) Jackson Lewis P.C., one of the country's largest and fastest-growing workplace law firms, is pleased to announce the firm and 62 of its attorneys have been recognized in the 2015 edition of Chambers USA: America's Leading Lawyers for Business, a prestigious annual guide ranking...
|Reported Cases||Sample Case Law Decisions: Tweed v. King Pharms., Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31171 (EDTN) (granting motion for summary judgment); Moyle, et al. v. Liberty Mut. Ret. Benefit Plan, et al., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92324 (SDCA 2013) (granting defendants motion for summary judgment and denying plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment ); Teitel, et al. v. Deloitte & Touche Pension Plan, 420 Fed. Appx. 116, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 8714 (2d Cir. 2011) (affirming dismissal of a purported class action regarding pension plan calculations based on the failure to exhaust administrative remedies); Huss v. IBM Med. & Dental Plan, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 7563 (7th Cir. 2011) (reversing summary judgment for plaintiff and remanding to the plan administrator for further review, reversing most statutory penalties and reversing the plaintiff's attorneys' fee award); Wilcox v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., 368 Fed. Appx. 700; 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 6248 (8th Cir. 2010) (affirming denial of plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees for successful summary judgment motion); Fischer v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., 576 F.3d 369 (7th Cir. 2009) (affirming grant of summary judgment to the defendants and application of the deferential standard of review); Denmark v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., 566 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2009) (explaining the practical application of deferential review and the scope of discovery post-Glenn); Johnson v. Michelin N. Am., 658 F. Supp. 2d 732 (D.S.C. 2009) (affirming summary judgment for the defendant in pension plan dispute); Boyle v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75878 (N.D. Ill. 2009) (granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants under medical plan); Fetterhoff v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., 282 Fed. Appx. 740, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 13132 (11th Cir. 2008) (affirming summary judgment in favor of defendant based on the statute of limitations); Moyle v. Golden Eagle Ins. Corp., 239 Fed. Appx. 362; 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 20752 (9th Cir. 2007) (affirming dismissal for failing to exhaust administrative remedies to obtain clarification of his future rights to pension benefits); Boyle v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38108 (N.D. Ill. 2008) (granting remand to the plan administrator); Pearson v. Abbot Labs. Annuity Ret. Plan, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66892; 42 (D.S.C. 2007) (dismissing fiduciary duty claim and the demand for a jury trial); Rutledge v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., 481 F.3d 655 (8th Cir. 2007) (affirming summary judgment for defendant); Smith v. Pepsi Bottling Group (PBG), 271 Fed. Appx. 313, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65201(4th Cir. 2008 (affirming grant of summary judgment as to the plaintiffs claims and grant of summary judgment to Pepsi on the counterclaim for conversion against plaintiff); Dillards v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., 456 F.3d 894 (8th Cir. 2006) (reversing award of summary judgment to plaintiff, awarding summary judgment to defendant and affirming reimbursement award to defendant); Wert v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., 447 F.3d 1060 (8th Cir. 2006) (affirming judgment for defendant based on failure to exhaust administrative remedies); Leeson v. Transamerica Disability Income Plan, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37650 (W.D. Wash. 2006) (judgment for defendant and rejecting challenge to standard of review); Pace v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7702 (S.D.Ala. 2006) (summary judgment for defendant); Gecht v. Sayles, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 39786, 36 E.B.C. (BNA) 1155 (N.D.Ill. 2005) (judgment for defendant); Mullaly v. Ins. Serv. Office, 395 F.Supp.2d 290 (M.D.N.C. 2005) (denial of plaintiff's motion to remand); Boyd v. Liberty Life Assur. Co., 362 F.Supp.2d 660 (E.D.N.C. 2005) (judgment for defendant, enforcing mental and nervous plan limitation); Flint, et al. v. ABB, Inc., 229 F.Supp.2d 1338 (S.D.Fla. 2002), affirmed, 337 F.3d 1326 (11th Cir. 2003), cert. denied, 540 U.S. 1219 (2004) (affirming dismissal of a purported class action seeking interest on delayed benefits); The Utah Alcoholism Foundation, et al. v. Battelle Memorial Institute, et al., 204 F. Supp. 2d 1295, 28 E.B.C. 1547 (D. Utah 2002) (judgment for defendants); Haulbrook v. Michelin North America, Inc., et al., 252 F.3d 696 (4th Cir. 2001) (affirming ADA judgment for defendants); Booth v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Associates Health and Welfare Plan, 201 F.3d 335 (4th Cir. 2000) (significant standard of review decision; reversing summary judgment for plaintiff and entering judgment for defendant); Rogers v. Department of Health & Environmental Control, 985 F.Supp.2d 635 (D.S.C. 1997), affirmed, 174 F.3d 431 (4th Cir. 1999) (affirming summary judgment for defendant in ADA challenge to governmental LTD plan); Wheeless v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Associates Health and Welfare Plan, 39 F. Supp. 2d 577 (E.D.N.C. 1998) (trial judgment for defendant and an award of reimbursement to defendant over $100,000); Gluth v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 21 E.B.C. 1353, 1997 US App LEXIS 16451 (4th Cir. 1997) (reversing summary judgment for plaintiff and entering judgment for defendant)|
View Ratings & Reviews
|Profile Visibility |
|#65 in weekly profile views out of 1,710 lawyers in Greenville, South Carolina|
|#31,669 in weekly profile views out of 1,705,233 total lawyers Overall|