Perez v. Hanco Inc et al
| Thomas E Perez |
| Hanco Inc, Harry T Richardson, Jr, Hanco Inc 401(K) Plan The, Hanco Inc Health Plan The and Hanco Inc Dental Plan The |
| 3:2014cv01908 |
| September 19, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Indiana |
| South Bend Office |
| Miami |
| Christopher A Nuechterlein |
| Philip P Simon |
| Labor: E.R.I.S.A. |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
22
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 20 MOTION for Default Judgment as to Defendant Hanco, Inc. d/b/a Classico Seating filed by Thomas E Perez. Hanco is ORDERED to restore $25,697.32 to the Hanco, Inc. Health Plan and $2,609.44 to the Hanc o, Inc. Dental Plan. Hanco is also permanently enjoined from violating the provisions of Title I of ERISA, from serving as a fiduciary for any Hanco employee benefit plan or Hanco employee welfare benefit plan, and from serving as a fiduciary or serv ice provider to any ERISA-covered employee benefit plan. Secretary to submit a recommendation within 30 days of an individual to serve as an independent fiduciary to terminate the 401(k) plan and to distribute the plans assets to its beneficiaries and participants. Hanco is ORDERED to pay the fees and expenses of the independentfiduciary. The Secretary is awarded the costs of this action. ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Chief Judge Philip P Simon on 10/15/15. (mlc)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Indiana Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
