Anderson v. Intel—A Test Case Regarding the Prudence of Adding Alternative Investments to Defined Contribution Plan Menus - podcast episode cover

Anderson v. Intel—A Test Case Regarding the Prudence of Adding Alternative Investments to Defined Contribution Plan Menus

Apr 15, 20218 min
--:--
--:--
Download Metacast podcast app
Listen to this episode in Metacast mobile app
Don't just listen to podcasts. Learn from them with transcripts, summaries, and chapters for every episode. Skim, search, and bookmark insights. Learn more

Episode description

In this third episode in a series of Ropes & Gray podcasts addressing emerging issues for fiduciaries of 401(k) and 403(b) plans to consider as part of their litigation risk management strategy, litigation & enforcement partner Amy Roy and benefits consultant Aneisha Worrell discuss some key takeaways from Anderson v. Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee, the first case to date to address the prudence question under ERISA of including private equity and hedge fund investments on a defined contribution plan menu.
For the best experience, listen in Metacast app for iOS or Android