On April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court decided Cunningham v. Cornell University, No. 23-1007, holding that a plaintiff may state a prohibited-transaction claim in violation of ERISA § 406(a) without referencing the exemptions...more
On February 26, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Intel Corporation Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma, holding that, for purposes of ERISA’s three-year statute of limitations, a plan beneficiary does not have “actual...more
2/28/2020
/ Actual or Constructive Knowledge ,
Appeals ,
Breach of Duty ,
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) ,
Fiduciary Duty ,
Intel Corp. Investment Policy Committee v. Sulyma ,
Material Disclosures ,
Question of Fact ,
Reaffirmation ,
Retirement Plan ,
Retirement Plan Beneficiaries ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Split of Authority ,
Statute of Limitations ,
Summary Judgment
On March 1, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Gobeille v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, No. 14-181, holding that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) pre-empts Vermont’s regulatory scheme requiring...more
On May 18, 2015, the United States Supreme Court decided Tibble v. Edison International, No. 13-550, holding that under the Employment Retirement Income Securities Act (ERISA), a plaintiff may timely commence a claim for...more