Featured Jobs
|
New York City District Council of Carpenters Benefit Funds
|
|
Retirement Planners and Administrators (RPA)
|
|
Fringe Benefit Group
|
|
TPA Retirement Plan Consultant EPIC RPS (TPA/DPS)
|
|
Defined Contributions Compliance Consultant Loren D. Stark Company (LDSCO)
|
|
Great Lakes Pension Associates, Inc.
|
|
Senior Specialist 401k Recordkeeping T Bank N.A.
|
|
Pollard & Associates
|
|
Retirement Solutions Specialists
|
|
Defined Contribution Account Manager Nova 401(k) Associates
|
|
Greenline Wealth Management
|
Free Newsletters
“BenefitsLink continues to be the most valuable resource we have at the firm.”
-- An attorney subscriber
|
|
|
12 Matching News Items |
| 1. |
Minnesota District Court Applies De Novo Review, Finds SPD Discretionary Language Ineffectual Where Plan Document Failed to Grant Discretion (PDF)
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota 
May 15, 2014
"If the Life Policy was ambiguous as to whether it conferred discretion to [the defendant Life Insurance Co. of North America (LINA)], this SPD language may have resolved the ambiguity in LINA's favor. Because the Life Policy is not ambiguous, however, the SPD cannot by itself confer discretion to LINA at beneficiaries' expense." [Bowers v. Life Ins. Co. of North America (LINA), No. 13-891 (D. Minn. May 14, 2014)]
|
| 2. |
DOL Notifies District Court of Intent to Extend Transition Period and Delay Applicability Dates for Fiduciary Rule and PTEs (PDF)
U.S. Department of Labor [DOL], via U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
Aug. 9, 2017
"[DOL hereby notifies] the Court that on August 9, 2017, the Department submitted to [OMB] proposed amendments to three exemptions, entitled: Extension of Transition Period and Delay of Applicability Dates From January 1, 2018, to July 1, 2019; Best Interest Contract Exemption (PTE 2016-01); Class Exemption for Principal Transactions in Certain Assets Between Investment Advice Fiduciaries and Employee Benefit Plans and IRAs (PTE 2016-02); Prohibited Transaction Exemption 84-24 for Certain Transactions Involving Insurance Agents an d Brokers, Pension Consultants, Insurance Companies, and Investment Company Principal Underwriters (PTE 84-24). Notification of the submission becomes publicly available the morning after submission."
|
| 3. |
Text of Federal District Court Opinion Granting Award of Attorney's Fees Because of Extended Delays in Approval of Disability Benefits (PDF)
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
Aug. 18, 2014
"LINA could have exercised greater care in reviewing the record and applying the literal terms of its Policy to its review of Nozal's claim.... LINA offered to pay Nozal's attorney's fees and costs, but offered her nothing in return for the significant delay and apparent violation of the ERISA plan's administrative review process. Nozal's attorney will not be faulted for rejecting such an offer.... LINA sought an extension to answer the Complaint and ostensibly to continue settlement negotiations, which Nozal granted. However, instead of continuing to negotiate, LINA filed a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the entire Complaint and largely ignored the delay in the appeals process." [Nozal v. Allina Health Systems Long-Term Disability Benefit Plan; and Life Insurance Company of North America [LINA], No. 13-2270 (D. Minn. Aug. 15, 2014)]
|
| 4. |
Text of District Court Opinion Dismissing Participant Claims of Breach of ERISA Duty of Loyalty in Wells Fargo Stock Drop Claim (PDF)
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
July 23, 2018
"[P]laintiffs do not claim that defendants misled them about 'plan- and benefit- specific information,' such as the terms of Wells Fargo's 401(k) plan.... Instead, plaintiffs claim that defendants failed to disclose inside corporate information 'that might affect the value of the corporation's stock' -- information that would be of interest to every member of the investing public.... [To] the extent that plaintiffs' loyalty claim relies solely on defendants' nondisclosure of inside information about Wells Fargo's present and future financial condition, plaintiffs' loyalty claim must be dismissed." [In re: Wells Fargo ERISA 401(k) Litigation, No. 16-3405 (D. Minn. July 19, 2018)]
|
| 5. |
District Court Dismisses Class Action Challenge to UnitedHealth PBM Payments (PDF)
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
Dec. 20, 2017
36 pages. "Plaintiffs allege ... that they were entitled to pay less than they were charged as copayments or coinsurance under the terms of their plans because their plans entitled Plaintiffs to receive the benefit of the discounted rate ... Plaintiffs allege that they purchased certain drugs on numerous occasions and were overcharged due to OptumRx's contribution calculations, resulting in spreads and clawbacks.... [The plans] do not entitle those ERISA Plaintiffs to the discounted rate as a 'lesser of' payment option when filling prescription drugs at retail network pharmacies. Because those ERISA Plaintiffs do not allege that Defendants violated the terms of their Plans other than by not allowing them to pay lesser, discounted rates, such Plaintiffs fail to state claims for benefits under ERISA Section 502(a)(1)(B)." [In re UnitedHealth Group PBM Litigation, No. 16-3352 (D. Minn. Dec. 19, 2017)]
|
| 6. |
Text of District Court Decision Granting Preliminary Injunction Against Anti-Arbitration Clause of BICE, and Staying Further Proceedings (PDF)
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
Nov. 7, 2017
"Although the Court recognizes the presumption of good faith given to governmental actors when voluntary cessation is involved, the anti-arbitration condition remains in place, the potential actions of two different agencies are implicated, the rulemaking process can be lengthy, and Thrivent requires certainty for purposes of advance planning and legal compliance.... In order to comply with the anti-arbitration condition's applicability date, Thrivent must take actions now that involve changes to its business model. In addition to the expenditure of time and money that these changes necessitate, undertaking such changes may irreparably disadvantage Thrivent against its competitors and with respect to its members.... Following the issuance of the preliminary injunction, the Court hereby stays these proceedings, pending further order of the Court. The parties shall jointly file a status report every 60 days addressing whether a continued stay of proceedings is necessary." [Thrivent Financial for Lutherans v. Acosta, No. 16-3289 (D. Minn. Nov. 3, 2017)]
|
| 7. |
Thrivent Financial Challenges DOL Fiduciary Rule
Bloomberg BNA
Sept. 30, 2016
"Thrivent's lawsuit, filed Sept. 29 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, takes aim at the rule's 'best interest contract' (BIC) exemption.... The BIC exemption would require Thrivent, a fraternal benefit society based in Minnesota, to cease conducting certain business or to 'abandon its longstanding commitment' to resolving member disputes through alternative dispute resolution methods, the complaint said."
|
| 8. |
Text of Ninth Circuit Opinion Denying Surcharge Relief for Benefits Paid in Error (PDF)
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
June 9, 2014
"Amara did not suggest that the remedy of surcharge is available to provide any sort of '[m]ake-whole relief for breach of fiduciary duty against a trustee' regardless 'whether or not traditional trust law would have provided that relief under the "surcharge" terminology.' ... We are bound by our own precedent, which correctly identifies surcharge as including only unjust enrichment and losses to the trust estate.... [T]he beneficiary is entitled to restoration of the trust res, not to benefit at the expense of other beneficiaries. Indeed, under traditional trust law principles, a beneficiary could be obliged to repay any payments received in error from the trust." [Gabriel v. Alaska Electrical Pension Fund, No. 12-35458 (9th Cir. June 6, 2014)]
|
| 9. |
DOL's New Stance on Fiduciary Rule at Odds in Thrivent Case
Bloomberg BNA
July 7, 2017
"Thrivent is urging the court to rule in its favor in light of the agency's July 3 announcement that it will no longer defend the validity of the best-interest-contract exemption's condition restricting class-litigation waivers as it applies to arbitration agreements, according to a letter filed July 5 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota."
|
| 10. |
Wells Fargo Wins Second Part of Securities Lending Case
StarTribune
Apr. 3, 2014
"The pension plan for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Minnesota, along with other pension funds, has lost a legal battle with Wells Fargo & Co. over tens of millions of dollars the funds lost in the bank's former securities lending program. The San Francisco-based bank did not breach its fiduciary duties to the pension funds, U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank said ... However, he explained in the 12-page order that he was 'constrained' by law to adopt the decision a jury reached last August in the case ... 'Significantly, however, the court notes that if it were not so bound, the court would find, based on the evidence presented at trial, that defendant breached its fiduciary duties to the ERISA plaintiffs,' Frank wrote in a footnote."
|
| 11. |
8th Cir.: Health Benefits Did Not Vest in 3M Retirees; Employer Could Increase Retirees' Premiums (PDF)
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Mar. 12, 2002
Hughes v. 3M Retiree Medical Plan and Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company (Feb. 28, 2002). Excerpt: Because the summary plan description does not contain vesting language and unambiguously reserves to 3M the right to change the ... benefits, we affirm the district court's judgment.
|
| 12. |
Plaintiffs Claim Victory in First Ruling Challenging DB Plan Actuarial Assumptions
Groom Law Group
July 21, 2019
"[Two plaintiffs'] firms have now filed nine lawsuits, all generally alleging that the mortality table ... that is used to calculate participants' early retirement or optional forms of benefits is not reasonable because it is outdated.... The U.S. district court in Minnesota ... is the first to decide on a motion to dismiss.... The court sided with the plaintiffs in finding that the plaintiffs' claims are for actuarially equivalent benefits under ERISA, and are not claims under the Code or Treasury regulations." [Smith v. U.S. Bancorp, No. 18-3405 (D. Minn. Jun. 27, 2019)]
|
|
Your Search Options
|
© 2024 BenefitsLink.com, Inc.