Tag: retirement plan litigation

U.S. Attorneys have filed a Statement of the Interest of the United States in a lawsuit, offering evidence that the state-run auto-IRA program is preempted.

They have filed a joint motion to stay all trial dates, but have not yet prepared details of the settlement agreement.

There has actually been relatively little helpful legal insight published by the courts, due to the fact that many ERISA cases end with settlements, while others are dismissed early on for pleading deficiencies.

The plaintiffs say new evidence came to light from MIT President Rafael Reif’s response to revelations that improper donations were received by MIT from the now-deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Following a high-profile 9th Circuit decision, Greystar argues that the plaintiff signed a Mutual Agreement to Arbitrate Claims that not only requires arbitration of her claims but forecloses her from bringing any class action.

The fiduciary breach lawsuit accuses plan fiduciaries of mapping $1 billion into a fund that lagged peer performance and was unpopular in the marketplace.

Plaintiffs suggest higher than average fees were not attributable to enhanced services for participants, but instead to defendants’ use of high-cost investment products and managers.

A U.S. District Judge in North Carolina determined the health system’s retirement and health plans were established and maintained for its employees by a political subdivision of the State.

A federal court judge moved forward most claims, but granted summary judgment to Massachusetts Institute of Technology defendants for a claim alleging a prohibited transaction between MIT and Fidelity Investments.

They argue that retirement plan disclosures give retirement plan participants the “actual knowledge” required by ERISA, whether participants read them or not, and that an appellate court decision in the Intel case exacerbates the risk of hindsight bias in ERISA cases.

According to an appellate court, a cause of action against a plan sponsors for defaulting on its multiemployer plan withdrawal liability began when the plan trustees first accelerated payments, despite a cycle of defaults, lawsuits and payments.

The 7th Circuit found a district court was hasty in granting summary judgment to the health care system before all discovery was obtained to prove or disprove the plaintiff’s arguments.

Participants in the CHS/Community Health Systems, Inc. Retirement Savings Plan have filed a lawsuit against the company, its retirement plan committee and the provider of target-date funds (TDFs) in the plan for maintaining excessively expensive and poorly performing underlying investments.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found Safelite’s NQDC plan to be covered under ERISA, so a participant’s claims for Section 409A violations should have been filed as an ERISA action.

A federal court judge refused to dismiss the case, finding that the new claim was not a released claim in a previous lawsuit settlement and the plaintiffs had made sufficient pleadings.

A federal district court judge found that since shares for the ESOP were purchased with borrowed funds, the subsequent lower valuation of the stock was an immediate equitable benefit to participants.

The 9th Circuit has ruled that Supreme Court decisions show forced arbitration is in fact permissible in the context of Employee Retirement Income Security Act litigation.

The court found as a fiduciary to the ESOP, Evolve Bank failed to notice, question or investigate several red flags that appeared in the appraisal of the stock that was used to set the share price for a 2010 purchase.

Courts should “recognize that Congress and the SEC have already made a judgment about when a public disclosure would do more harm than good, and prudent fiduciaries should generally not second-guess that judgment,” an amicus curiae brief states.