Arguments in the new case closely resemble previous lawsuits filed against other firms citing the ERISA fiduciary duties of prudence and of monitoring fiduciaries.
A judge determined the firm didn’t breach its ERISA fiduciary duties when it encouraged Lowe’s to move more than a billion dollars in plan assets to one of Aon’s own investment funds.
A new lawsuit suggests the individual advisory program TIAA clients were rolled into was significantly more expensive and generated hundreds of millions of dollars in fees for TIAA—without providing commensurate performance benefits.
The ruling states that the court does not believe hearing oral arguments would be helpful in resolving the parties’ cross motions, and it concludes the facts as pled do not raise a ‘plausible inference’ that a fiduciary breach occurred.
The appellate court has rejected the use of the "Segal Blend" when calculating withdrawal liability.
In granting the defense’s motion for summary judgment, the court brings to a close one of the longest-running and most complicated ERISA lawsuits.
The ruling breaks from other district court orders that have held ERISA plaintiffs lack Article III standing to bring claims regarding funds in which they did not personally invest.
The underlying complaint was dismissed ‘without prejudice,’ meaning the plaintiff can attempt to replead the claims in a way that satisfies the rules of standing.
The firm has been added as a defendant in a lawsuit that challenges the use of Prudential's GoalMaker asset allocation solution.
The owner of a 403(b) plan administration firm and another insurance agent have been charged with multiple counts of securities fraud violations.
A judge has determined the fiduciary breach lawsuit filed against the former parent company of Victoria’s Secret and Bath and Body Works, alleging excessive recordkeeping fees and other issues, may proceed to discovery.
A court refused to dismiss most claims against Aon Hewitt Investment Consultants and Centerra Group 401(k) plan fiduciaries.
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.
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.