Loan & Distribution Specialist AimPoint Pension
|
Defined Benefit Combo Cash Balance Compliance Consultant Loren D. Stark Company (LDSCO)
|
AimPoint Pension
|
Bates & Company, Inc.
|
Regional Vice President of Sales The Retirement Plan Company
|
Compass
|
“BenefitsLink continues to be the most valuable resource we have at the firm.”
-- An attorney subscriber
Supreme Court Declines to Hear 'Would Have' vs. 'Could Have' ERISA Case
Fiduciary Matters Blog June 29, 2015
"The 4th Circuit concluded that the defendants failed to have a prudent process because they failed to consider the best interests of the participants. The question then becomes, once you've shown a failure of procedural prudence, what can the fiduciary prove to show they still made the right substantive choice? The defendants wanted a standard that would have allowed them to put on evidence that a prudent fiduciary COULD have made the same decision. The plaintiffs, and ultimately the 4th Circuit, supported a standard where the defendant must show that a prudent fiduciary WOULD have made the same decision." [Tatum v. RJR Pension Investment Comm., No. 13-1360 (4th Cir. Aug. 4, 2014; cert. denied June 29, 2015)]
|
Please click here to report this link if it is broken (for example, if you see a "404 File Not Found" error message after you click on the linked news item's title). |
An important word about authorship: BenefitsLink® created this link to the news item, but we are not the news item's author (unless expressly shown above). |