Tag: retirement plan investments

In a case alleging George Washington University violated ERISA fiduciary duties with regard to retirement plan fees, a federal judge found the plaintiff had waived her right to sue in a previous agreement.

The ERISA fiduciary duty requires fiduciaries to act with prudence, not prescience, a court said.

Nothing in the settlement agreement calls for Eaton Vance to make any changes to its investment menu for the plan.

An appellate court revived two claims in the lawsuit that had been previously completely dismissed by a District Court, but in a dissenting opinion, one judge expressed concern about permitting implausible allegations to result in a large settlement.

FINRA claims AXA Advisors sent disclosures to 401(k) plan sponsors and participants that misrepresented the credit quality of bond funds with group annuity accounts.

During 2018, the $20 billion club shifted asset allocations significantly away from risky assets and into fixed income, Russell Investments found.

Anthem has agreed to pay $23.6 million to settle the lawsuit in addition to non-monetary terms.

Principal Financial Group launches the Principal Guaranteed Option, while Charles Schwab introduces subscription pricing for robo-advice. 

Comparing Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) cases to trust law cases, a federal judge decided to side with "the great weight of authority in the federal courts holding actions under ERISA to remedy alleged violations of fiduciary duties are equitable in nature," so there is no right to a jury trial.

In their second amended complaint, the plaintiffs argued that the Sequoia Fund purported to be a value fund, but increased investments in Valeant Pharmaceuticals created a “clear indicia of a growth stock,” and did not meet the Sequoia Fund’s purported investing criteria of seeking out value stocks.

The defendants were denied summary judgment on all claims.

The university has pared down to 11 investment options in its 403(b) plan.

The settlement agreement leaves open a chance to bring a new claim regarding the offering of a money market fund in the plan.

The plaintiffs accused Edward Jones of favoring its own investments and those of its “preferred partners” in its 401(k) plan, at the expense of performance; they also raised questions about excess recordkeeping fees.

The settlement amount is $4.5 million, and the Jackson National defendants admit no wrongdoing.

Finding "errors of law" in a district court's decision, the 1st Circuit remanded the duty of prudence claims for review.

The complaint specifically calls out the 11 T. Rowe Price target-date funds (TDFs) offered by the plans, saying they are all adviser or retail class funds—as opposed to investor or institutional class funds.