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 uncertainty over the fiduciary rule and increased participant litigation are prompting sponsors to move to lower-cost investment options.
The ERISA lawsuit has gained class certification after the plaintiffs successfully established numerosity, typicality and commonality.
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.
A federal court judge found most claims were not plausibly alleged by the plaintiffs.
The lead plaintiff suggests the providers created an asset allocation solution designed to seed high-fee funds over lower-cost options—charges the firms flatly deny.
Plaintiffs claim their 401(k) and 403(b) plan fiduciaries failed to adequately monitor investment services providers.
Large banks are accused by the federal pension funds of working together behind the scenes to protect their interests as middle men in the securities lending marketplace.
Many retirement industry providers will be glad to see the DOL is starting to signal a delay in the applicability date of the full new fiduciary rule and its prohibited transaction provisions.
There were thousands of new comments submitted on the fiduciary rule RFI by a variety of parties, from concerned individual investors to the largest recordkeepers and asset managers.
At least one judge on the three-judge panel that has been assigned to the case seemed to have little sympathy for the basic strokes of the DOL’s arguments.
At various times between 2006 and 2009, according to EBSA findings, the plan was 100% invested in stock warrants.