The denial leaves in place an appellate court’s decision that claims in a lawsuit against the University of Southern California fell outside the scope of arbitration agreements signed by plaintiffs in the case, so the lawsuit over two of the university’s retirement plans may proceed.
In addition to a more than $13 million payment, Franklin has agreed to select a non-proprietary target-date fund (TDF) for its 401(k) plan’s investment lineup and increase company match contributions for three years.
Employees of Kroger say Central States’ plan trustees refused to negotiate a proposal with them after they filed an ERISA fiduciary duty lawsuit, but court documents show the trustees attempted negotiations after the filing of the suit and not before.
A district court in California has issued a mixed ruling in a self-dealing lawsuit filed against Schwab Retirement Plan Services and other defendants.
Details in the text of the complaint explain that the stock price drop that plaintiffs say unduly harmed participants is tied to revelations that certain Johnson and Johnson products contained asbestos.
According to the lawsuit, Stadion directed participants’ accounts into investments that would better benefit itself and Mutual of Omaha, and Mutual of Omaha retained revenue sharing knowing of Stadion’s actions.
In addition, a federal district court has ordered the trustee of the plans not to serve in a fiduciary capacity to any Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) employee benefit plan.
The district court had several times ruled against the firm in summary dismissal and discovery decisions—but the firm has prevailed against ERISA fiduciary breach claims after an 11 day trial.
In addition to asking the high court to weigh in on whether the plaintiff or the defendant bears the burden of proof on loss causation under ERISA, Putnam asked the court to determine whether showing that particular investment options did not perform as well as a set of index funds selected by the plaintiffs with the benefit of hindsight, suffices as a matter of law to establish “losses to the plan.”
Three Mayer Brown ERISA attorneys discuss the current litigation landscape and offer practical strategies for promoting compliance in 2019.
Both parties agreed to dismiss the litigation under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a), and each party will bear its own attorneys’ fees and expenses.
S. Derrin Watson, a pension attorney and educator, has been answering questions from ERISApedia clients for the last year and has edited and selected over 400 ASK responses to subscribers to add to the eSource.
A schedule to help plan sponsors track important due dates for their plan
The colorfully worded opinion chides plaintiffs for failing to acknowledge the unique character of 403(b) retirement plans—including their common use of annuities and multiple recordkeepers.
The complaint argues defendants violated ERISA duties by reinterpreting plan language in a conflicted manner aimed at reducing employer costs.
In his opinion, the district court judge says an ERISA complaint of this nature does not need to describe in exhaustive detail the ways in which plaintiffs believe defendants breached their fiduciary duties.
The complaint suggests Transamerica continued to offer proprietary portfolios when their rates of return were meaningfully below stated long-term benchmarks.