July 28, 2026  ·  Complaint filed July 20, 2026  ·  paed, No. 2:26-cv-05047

Newman News, By David Brunk

Read the filing

McGrory Estate Sues PNC, WTW for $154K Pension After Alleged Forfeiture by Omission

Benefit Denial Tied to Plan’s Failure to Notify Decedent of Commencement Obligation

The estate of Mary Claire McGrory, a former Continental Bank vice president, sued The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc., its pension plan, the Administrative Committee of the PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. Pension Plan, and Willis Towers Watson US LLC on July 20, 2026, alleging the defendants violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by denying a $154,430.58 vested pension benefit after her death. McGrory, born December 21, 1955, was employed by Continental Bank from approximately July 1973 until her termination on March 30, 1993, during which time she received a taxable distribution of $19,529.67 from the Midlantic Profit Sharing Plan on July 15, 1993, according to the complaint (Compl. ¶17). She was a vested participant in the PNC Pension Plan, which absorbed the Continental Bank pension plan, with a Normal Retirement Date of January 1, 2021.

The PNC Pension Plan, which held total pension assets of $5.633 billion as of December 31, 2023, covers 118,122 participants, including 24,734 retired or terminated vested participants receiving payment and 36,289 terminated vested participants entitled to future benefits (Compl. ¶13). The plan’s funding target attainment percentage stood at 97.57% as of January 1, 2024, indicating a well-funded status (Compl. ¶24). The plan’s January 1, 2021, benefit estimate showed a lump-sum value of $156,047.90 or a single life annuity of $813.88 per month. By April 1, 2025, the lump-sum value was $154,430.58, while the monthly annuity increased to $1,195.10 (Compl. ¶3).

McGrory died on April 8, 2025, at age 69. On May 1, 2025, her son, James G. McGrory, was appointed administrator of her estate (File No. A1967-2025). The complaint alleges that on December 11, 2025, George H. Baer, an administrator for the PNC Pension Plan, notified the estate that no retirement benefit was payable, citing plan provisions that allegedly required benefit commencement before death and the absence of a surviving spouse. The denial referenced Midlantic Pension Plan Sections 6.01 and 6.04 (Compl. ¶43). The complaint further alleges that the defendants’ failure to notify McGrory—who was 65 years old on her Normal Retirement Date and had a vested benefit exceeding $150,000—that she needed to commence her benefit to avoid forfeiture "constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty" (Compl. ¶64a). The complaint alleges that more than $150,000 in accrued benefits were forfeited by the defendants (Compl. ¶64a).

Document Requests Met With Delays and Partial Responses

On August 11, 2025, the estate sent its first formal written document request to the defendants, demanding plan documents and records explaining the reduction in McGrory’s lump-sum benefit from 2021 to 2025. ERISA requires plan administrators to respond to such requests within 30 days, but the defendants failed to meet this deadline. The complaint alleges that "WTW affirmatively inserted itself into the response chain, communicated on behalf of PNC, and confirmed its agency — then deflected without producing a single document" (Compl. ¶71). The 30-day deadline for the defendants’ response to the August 11, 2025, request expired on September 10, 2025, marking the beginning of the statutory penalty period (Compl. ¶37).

On August 28, 2025, PNC, Inc. of Polo, Illinois, responded to the estate’s request, clarifying that it was unrelated to The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. The estate’s counsel acknowledged this distinction the following day (Compl. ¶36). On September 23, 2025, Willis Towers Watson US LLC responded via email, deferring to PNC and producing no documents (Compl. ¶35). The complaint notes that this response occurred 43 days after the initial request, well beyond the ERISA-mandated 30-day window. The Administrative Committee of the PNC Pension Plan also failed to respond to the August 11, 2025, request within the required timeframe (Compl. ¶37).

On October 15, 2025, Josephine Pitta, Vice President and Supervisor of Benefits Administration at PNC, transmitted a partial response via secure email, including the 2024 Annual Funding Notice, benefit estimates, and some plan documents (Compl. ¶39). However, the estate’s October 31, 2025, follow-up letter noted that critical documents remained outstanding, including the PNC Pension Plan document, the Continental Bank Pension Plan document, and the plan’s Form 5500 for 2023, which had been filed on October 10, 2023 (Compl. ¶40). The estate demanded a final determination by November 10, 2025, but the defendants did not comply.

On December 4, 2025, the estate’s counsel asked the defendants to explain the reduction in McGrory’s lump-sum benefit from $156,047.90 in 2021 to $154,430.58 in 2025 and to clarify the procedure for lump-sum payouts. The defendants did not respond to these questions (Compl. ¶46). On March 10, 2026, the estate’s counsel sent another letter contesting the forfeiture of McGrory’s benefit and requesting additional documents, including the Continental Bank Pension Plan document and the PNC Pension Plan document, but the defendants again failed to produce the requested documents (Compl. ¶47, ¶49). The complaint notes that the defendants did not produce the PNC Pension Plan document, the Continental Bank Pension Plan document, or the Form 5500, despite repeated requests (Compl. ¶49).

Statutory Penalties Accrue at $110 Per Day Per Document

The defendants’ failure to timely produce the requested documents triggered statutory penalties under ERISA § 502(c)(1), which imposes liability of up to $110 per day for each document not provided within 30 days of a written request. The complaint alleges that the estate’s August 11, 2025, request met the "clear notice" standard under Kollman v. Hewitt Associates, LLC, entitling the estate to penalties (Compl. ¶73). The complaint identifies seven specific documents that were not produced within the 30-day window, including the PNC Pension Plan document, the Continental Bank Pension Plan document, and the plan’s Form 5500 for 2023 (Compl. ¶75).

For the first three documents, the estate calculates a penalty of $3,850.00 each, reflecting a 35-day delay from the September 10, 2025, deadline to the October 15, 2025, partial response. For the remaining four documents, the penalty accrues at $110 per day for 307 days, totaling $33,770 per document through July 15, 2026. As of July 15, 2026, the estimated total document penalties accrued amount to $146,630.00, with an additional $440 per day ($110 per day × 4 documents) continuing to accrue thereafter (Compl. ¶75). The complaint notes that the penalties will continue to accumulate until the defendants fully comply with the estate’s document requests.

The complaint alleges that WTW, as the plan’s actuary and agent, is jointly and severally liable for the penalties. The complaint states, "WTW acted as an agent of the Plan Administrator in managing the document response process, subjecting it to § 502(c)(1) penalties" (Compl. ¶71). The estate seeks the maximum statutory penalty, citing ERISA’s provision that "any administrator who fails or refuses to comply with a request for information... shall be personally liable... in the amount of up to $110 per day" (Compl. ¶70). The complaint further alleges that the defendants’ failure to produce the requested documents has hindered the estate’s ability to evaluate the benefit denial, stating, "Defendants denied benefits worth over $154,000 while withholding the very documents that would enable Plaintiff to evaluate the denial" (Compl. ¶78).

Fiduciary Breach Claims Target Notification Failures and Document Withholding

The estate’s second count alleges that the Administrative Committee of the PNC Pension Plan and Willis Towers Watson US LLC breached their fiduciary duties under ERISA § 502(a)(3) (29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(3)). The complaint asserts that ERISA requires "each fiduciary discharge its duties with respect to a plan solely in the interest of the participants and beneficiaries" (Compl. ¶63). The estate identifies multiple breaches of these duties, including:

• The defendants failed to notify McGrory that she needed to commence her benefit to avoid forfeiture, as explicitly alleged in the complaint: "failure to notify the Decedent — who was only 65 years old on her NRD and who had a vested benefit of over $150,000 — that she needed to commence her benefit to avoid forfeiture constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty" (Compl. ¶64a).
• The defendants failed to respond to the estate’s written document requests within the ERISA-required timeframe, violating their duty to provide plan participants and beneficiaries with timely access to plan documents and information.
• The defendants withheld key plan documents, including the Continental Bank Pension Plan document and the PNC Pension Plan document, which the estate required to evaluate the benefit denial (Compl. ¶64e).
• The defendants’ December 11, 2025, denial letter lacked a detailed explanation as required by 29 C.F.R. § 2560.503-1 (Compl. ¶64f).

The complaint seeks equitable relief, including document production, reformation of the denial determination, and a surcharge for the alleged breaches. The estate argues that these breaches caused distinct injuries not compensable by the benefit payment sought under Count I, such as lost benefit enjoyment during McGrory’s lifetime and increased litigation costs incurred by the estate to challenge the denial (Compl. ¶65).

Court to Review Benefit Denial Under Arbitrary and Capricious Standard

The complaint alleges that the Court reviews the denial of benefits under the arbitrary and capricious standard, as established by Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch (Compl. ¶52). The estate argues that the plan administrator acted arbitrarily and capriciously by failing to produce the governing plan document or by relying on superseded provisions (Compl. ¶53). Specifically, the complaint asserts that the defendants’ December 11, 2025, denial of benefits was arbitrary and capricious because it lacked a reasoned explanation and relied on plan provisions that may not have been in effect or properly applied (Compl. ¶54). The complaint further alleges that the defendants’ failure to provide the Continental Bank Pension Plan document and the PNC Pension Plan document prevented the estate from verifying the validity of the provisions cited in the denial (Compl. ¶49).

The estate contends that the defendants’ actions violated ERISA’s anti-forfeiture protections, as the complaint’s March 10, 2026, letter argued that ERISA Section 208 prohibits the forfeiture of vested benefits (Compl. ¶47). The complaint alleges that the defendants’ reliance on Midlantic Pension Plan Sections 6.01 and 6.04 to deny benefits was improper, as these provisions may not have been applicable to McGrory’s benefit (Compl. ¶43). The estate seeks reformation of the plan’s benefit denial determination to conform to ERISA’s requirements and ensure that McGrory’s vested benefits are not improperly forfeited.

Estate Seeks Full Benefit Payment, Penalties, and Equitable Relief

The estate’s complaint seeks comprehensive relief across its three counts. For Count I, which alleges a denial of accrued retirement benefits under ERISA § 502(a)(1)(B) (29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B)) against all defendants, the estate seeks a declaration of its entitlement to the full accrued pension benefit, an order directing payment of the $154,430.58 lump sum plus pre-judgment interest from January 1, 2021, and reformation of the plan’s benefit denial determination to conform to ERISA’s anti-forfeiture and survivor benefit requirements (Compl. ¶¶ Relief). The complaint alleges that the defendants’ actions resulted in the forfeiture of more than $150,000 in accrued benefits allegedly owed to the estate (Compl. ¶64a).

For Count II, the estate seeks equitable relief, including an order requiring the Administrative Committee and WTW to produce all plan documents and provide an accounting of the benefit calculation. The complaint also requests a surcharge for the alleged breaches of fiduciary duty, as well as attorneys’ fees and costs (Compl. ¶65). The estate argues that the defendants’ breaches caused distinct injuries, such as the loss of benefit enjoyment during McGrory’s lifetime and the estate’s increased litigation costs, which are not compensable by the benefit payment alone.

For Count III, which alleges statutory penalties for failure to provide plan documents under ERISA § 502(c)(1) (29 U.S.C. § 1132(c)(1)) against the Administrative Committee and WTW, the estate seeks the maximum statutory penalty of $146,630.00 accrued through July 15, 2026, plus $440 per day thereafter until judgment, jointly and severally against these defendants. The complaint notes that the penalties will continue to accumulate at a rate of $440 per day ($110 per day × 4 documents) until the defendants fully comply with the estate’s document requests (Compl. ¶75). The estate also requests attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to ERISA § 502(g)(1), as well as pre-judgment interest on all amounts awarded at the applicable federal rate (Compl. ¶¶ Relief).

The complaint alleges that "Defendants denied benefits worth over $154,000 while withholding the very documents that would enable Plaintiff to evaluate the denial" (Compl. ¶78). It further asserts that the defendants’ actions have resulted in significant financial harm to the estate, including the loss of McGrory’s vested pension benefits and the imposition of substantial statutory penalties for document non-production. The estate seeks any other equitable relief the Court deems just, appropriate, or necessary to remedy the defendants’ alleged violations of ERISA.

The allegations described here are taken from the filing and remain unproven; no responsive pleading is reflected in the source document.

David Brunk is a civil litigation attorney. He can be reached at david@newmanbrunk.com.