The dismissal order in the case includes several points of success for the plaintiffs, and while the suit has been tossed out due to a lack of standing, the court has left room for them to file an amended complaint.
Plan fiduciaries are accused of misleading participants in benefits communications and interfering with benefits by arbitrarily assigning them the status of 'terminated' due to a spinoff.
Allegations that the company inappropriately favored actively managed funds over passive investment options for its retirement plan have fallen short upon preliminary review in federal court.
A DOL investigation and legal pursuit that have spanned the better part of two decades have drawn to a close, resulting in a $42 million judgment against the former attorney and affiliated companies.
In a brief of amicus curiae filed in the suit against the Red Cross, the agency claims the suits are harming plan participants and asks the court to apply careful scrutiny in the case.
A court found that the plaintiffs did not state a plausible claim for breach of fiduciary duties. They have already filed an amended complaint.
The claims are typical of excessive fee suits, but the plaintiffs also cite language from the 403(b) plan's investment policy statement and say plan fiduciaries didn't follow it.
The plaintiffs are employees and retirement plan participants at DST Systems who argue the defendants pursued ‘an exceptionally imprudent investment strategy’ with respect to a significant portion of their retirement assets.
The appellate court agreed with the plaintiffs that the lower court erred in dismissing share class-related claims and in denying them leave to amend the suit to add more defendants.
The claims included in the complaint, which in some respects directly contradict arguments made by other plaintiffs in related fiduciary breach cases, underscore just how many potential avenues for scrutiny plan sponsors face.
The complaint claims participants overpaid millions of dollars to Xerox’s recordkeeper from 2015 through 2021.
The text of the lawsuit notes the fast pace of the filing of excessive fee lawsuits against retirement plans operated by major U.S. employers, arguing SeaWorld owes its own employees more than $50 million in damages.
Among other allegations, the complaint says defendants continued to offer certain investment options despite the availability of identical or similar investment options with lower costs and/or better performance.
An amicus brief filed in a case involving Universal Health Services says a district court erred when it found the plaintiffs have standing to sue over 401(k) plan investments in which they did not invest.
Industry experts are watching for the imminent filing of new Department of Labor regulations pertaining to the use of environmental, social and governance themed portfolios by tax-advantaged retirement plan investors.
A judge left until later the issue of whether passively managed funds and actively managed funds are proper comparators.
The district court ruling in the case, now backed by an appeals court, stands out for having been filed alongside a sanction declaring the plaintiff’s law firm Schlichter Bogard & Denton behaved “recklessly.”
The suit says the solution directed participant contributions into high-cost investments.
The appeals court has technically affirmed, vacated and reversed parts of a district court ruling that granted summary judgement against the plaintiffs; while this sounds like a mixed outcome, the appellate ruling benefits the defense.