PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Best Practices for Reducing ERISA Litigation Risk
ERISA Claims: How Can Benefits Be An Employer’s Burden?
Since September 2023, ERISA plaintiff’s firms have filed approximately 60 class action lawsuits challenging the longstanding practice of plan sponsors using plan forfeitures to offset their employer contributions in 401(k)...more
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision Cunningham v. Cornell University, 145 S.Ct. 1020 (2025) significantly lowers the pleading standard for prohibited transaction claims under Section 406(a) of the Employee Retirement...more
A Florida district court recently gave TECO Energy, Inc. another victory in an ERISA case when it dismissed Plaintiff’s proposed class action with prejudice. Roche v. Teco Energy, Inc., No. 8:23-cv-01571, 2025 U.S. Dist....more
There has been a recent rise in Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) litigation against third-party administrators (TPAs) and other service providers challenging their management of self-funded health...more
If there’s a Mount Rushmore of ERISA class-action litigators, you better believe Jerry Schlichter’s face is carved into it—probably right next to a 408(b)(2) disclosure and a stack of mutual fund fee charts. And once again,...more
On January 10, 2025, in Spence v. American Airlines, a federal district court in Texas ruled that American Airlines (the company) and the committee overseeing its 401(k) plans (the committee) breached their duty of loyalty...more
Look, I get it. There are a lot of lawyers out there. Ambulance chasers, courtroom showmen, legal eagles with late-night TV spots and suspiciously white teeth. But here’s the thing: I’m not one of them....more
Excessive fee cases against plans governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) have been on the rise for the last decade. ERISA litigation is expanding with novel theories such as forfeiture litigation....more
On Thursday, April 17, a unanimous Supreme Court held that a less demanding pleading standard is applicable when plaintiffs bring an Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) class action under ERISA Section...more
Under the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Cunningham v. Cornell University, No. 23-1007 (April 17, 2025), plaintiffs asserting that ERISA plan administrators engaged in prohibited transactions under ERISA Section 406 are...more
In Cunningham v. Cornell University,1 the Supreme Court unanimously held that plaintiffs who bring a prohibited transaction claim under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”) are only...more
The April Monthly Minute showers readers with some eye-opening case law updates, ranging from a $38.8M jury verdict in a 401(k) fee case, to a pair of cases involving Elevance (f/k/a Anthem) health plan coverage exclusions....more
On April 17, the Supreme Court unanimously resolved a circuit split in Cunningham v. Cornell University, holding that plan participants need only allege that fiduciaries engaged in a “prohibited transaction” under the...more
The US Supreme Court has issued a unanimous opinion that could lead to an increase in litigation for prohibited transaction claims under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA)....more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision that dealt a blow to benefit plan fiduciaries nationwide. The Court unanimously held in Cunningham v. Cornell University that a plaintiff asserting that a plan and...more
On April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court decided Cunningham v. Cornell University, unanimously holding that a plaintiff can state a valid claim under ERISA by merely alleging that a plan used “plan assets” to pay a service...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion on the requirements for plaintiffs to survive a motion to dismiss regarding an allegation that plan fiduciaries engaged in a prohibited transaction under...more
On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in Cunningham v Cornell University, addressing the pleading standard applicable to prohibited transaction claims under the Employee Retirement Income...more
In a decision poised to change the landscape of Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) litigation, on April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court held in Cunningham et al. v. Cornell University et al. that a claimant...more
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
In a unanimous decision reversing dismissal of prohibited transaction claims based on fees paid to defined contribution plan recordkeepers, the Supreme Court held that ERISA’s prohibited transaction exemptions are affirmative...more
On Labor Day, September 2, 1974, Gerald Ford signed the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) into law. ERISA governs the employee benefit plans (i.e., retirement and welfare plans) of most private employers in...more
On March 10, 2024, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in a much-followed putative class action lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson (“J&J”) alleging that the plan fiduciaries for J&J’s group health plan violated ERISA by...more
In late October 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled in Romano v. Hancock Life Insurance Company, F.4th 729 (11th Cir. 2024) that certain foreign tax credits that were generated as a result...more
In Hutchins v. HP Inc., the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed – with prejudice – the plaintiff's claims challenging the use of forfeited employer 401(k) contributions. This is the latest...more