Not only does the lawsuit claim ConocoPhillips stock does not meet ERISA’s definition of “employer securities,” but it says participants suffered millions of dollars in losses as the stock price dropped dramatically.
The future head of EBSA would play a substantial role in the fate of the fiduciary rule.
Many terms of the settlement agreement between St. Joseph’s Hospital and its pension plan participants are similar to provisions of ERISA.
Specific policy changes and plan sponsor initiatives can make guaranteed lifetime income a norm in the DC plan space, TIAA suggests.
The complaint states that Johns Hopkins has not prudently managed its 403(b) plan, but a district court judge disagrees, at least on several aspects of the complaint.
The participant only prevailed in moving forward a claim that Verizon allowed an imprudent investment option to continue to be offered in its retirement plans.
An excessive fee lawsuit has been filed against fiduciaries of the Novitex Enterprise Solutions Retirement Savings Plan, a 401(k) plan which had more than $157 million in assets as of the end of 2015.
A federal district court ruled the plaintiffs did not meet all the pleading standards set forth by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Participants allege the company should have allowed a single recordkeeper to service its traditional DC plan and its 403(b) plan—and that it permitted excessive fees by paying for distinct administrative services for each.
A lawsuit alleges that asset-based fees led to the plan paying $1,819 per participant for recordkeeping services in 2015.
According to plaintiffs, Ruane’s flagship fund, the Sequoia Fund, contained more than $25 billion in assets until the firm “engaged in a misguided and reckless investment strategy.”
The relief regards verification procedures for plan loans and distributions, participant contributions and loan payments, blackout notices, and group health plan compliance.
Readers of a new publication from Research and Markets are taken step by step through ERISA regulations to help ensure that their plans are properly structured, qualified and implemented.
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ultimately determined there is no explicit restriction saying a critical-status multiemployer plan’s board of trustees cannot charge withdrawing employers for their share of the plan’s accumulated funding deficiency.
The ERISA lawsuit has gained class certification after the plaintiffs successfully established numerosity, typicality and commonality.
Ascension has agreed to pay of the first $29.5 million of benefits that are distributable to settlement class members in the event trust assets attributable to the plan become insufficient to pay such benefits.
A court certified a class in the consolidated lawsuit after first rejecting BB&T’s arguments that the class did not meet commonality and typicality requirements.