The St. Louis-based law firm of Schlichter, Bogard & Denton filed a class action on behalf of participants in the retirement plans of Novant Health Inc., seeking the...
A federal appeals court has dismissed claims of a participant in Suntrust Bank’s 401(k) plan that the company engaged in “corporate self-dealing” at the expense of plan participants.
Recent court cases are not the first efforts to try to protect retirement assets for employees in plans that have been designated as “church” plans by the Internal...
The Department of Labor (DOL) is seeking to recover pension plan assets, of behalf of participants, from a construction company based in Radford, Virginia.
A Yale Law School professor known for making waves in the retirement industry released a study arguing plan sponsors tend to establish investment menus that encourage underperformance.
Revenue-sharing payments are not necessarily a violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), but they are if not disclosed, a court ruled.
A federal appeals court has found a retirement plan participant need not show “harm” to pursue a remedy of plan reformation for failing to disclose information.
The Department of Labor (DOL) has received a consent judgment and order allowing it to name a new fiduciary to distribute the assets of a Captiva, Florida, retirement...
More defined contribution retirement plans are out of compliance with Department of Labor (DOL) and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations than some might think.
Secretary of Labor, Thomas E. Perez, has filed a federal court brief disputing a district court’s dismissal of John Hancock’s liability in an excessive fee case.
Northeast Professional Planning Group Inc. (NPPG) now offers ERISA 3(16) fiduciary services to assist plan sponsors in day-to-day administration and compliance efforts.
A New York-based home-care agency and its former owners have resolved issues with the Department of Labor (DOL) regarding an employee stock ownership plan (ESOP) offering.
A recent court decision reinforces the Employee Retirement Income Security Act’s (ERISA) requirement that plan sponsors act in the best interest of participants.
A federal district court has ruled that in a case involving allegations of harm to retirement benefits, plaintiffs lack standing to sue if they cannot substantiate the allegations.