Home Depot 401(k) Plan Lawsuit Ends 2 Days Before Supreme Court Review

Former participants in The Home Depot’s 401(k) retirement plan agreed to dismiss their complaint over alleged plan mismanagement just two days before the U.S. Supreme Court was set to decide whether to hear oral arguments in the case, according to a court filing on Wednesday.

In a motion filed with the U.S. Supreme Court, both sides in Jaime H. Pizarro et al. v. The Home Depot Inc. et al. requested the case be dismissed. The parties also agreed to pay their own legal costs, with the filing providing no other details.

Case Background

A group of current and former employees of The Home Depot Inc. sued the company in 2018 over its $9 billion, 230,000-participant FutureBuilder 401(k) plan, accusing The Home Depot’s fiduciaries of violating their obligations under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by failing to properly oversee the investment advisory services provided by managed-account vendors—leading to the plan incurring excessive fees—and by neglecting to monitor and remove underperforming investment options, thereby leaving participants with inferior choices than available alternatives.

The Home Depot’s fiduciaries won a summary judgment ruling in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia in 2022. The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, which backed the district court in 2024, and to the Supreme Court.

Federal appellate courts have generally been split on the issue. The 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th and 8th Circuits have held that, after plaintiffs allege an injury from a fiduciary breach, the burden shifts to the employer to disprove causation. In contrast, the 10th and 11th Circuits require plaintiffs to prove a direct link between fiduciary actions or inaction and the alleged harm.

In December 2025, the Department of Labor, responding to a Supreme Court request, reversed its previous position on the burden of proof in ERISA fiduciary breach cases. In the amicus brief, the DOL stated: “Following the change in [presidential] administration and this court’s invitation, the government has reviewed its position and concluded that the relevant authorities are better understood as leaving the burden of proving causation on ERISA plaintiffs.”

The DOL also referred to that more recent amicus brief in a filing with the 2nd Circuit in a case concerning Yale University’s 403(b) plan, rescinding a previous brief issued under former President Joe Biden.

The Supreme Court will still consider the Parker-Hannifin case, which concerns 401(k) plan fees, on January 9.