News & Analysis as of

Motion to Dismiss Employee Benefits

Mayer Brown

The Current State of the Law in ERISA Forfeitures Cases

Mayer Brown on

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

Jackson Lewis P.C.

Florida District Court Declines to Expand ERISA Disclosure Requirements

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

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

Jackson Lewis P.C.

Timing Is Everything: SCOTUS Shuts Down Retiree’s ADA Post-Employment Benefits Claim

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

Do former employees have the right to sue their previous employer under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for discrimination in the administration of post-employment fringe benefits? Resolving a circuit...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

Sixth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Excessive Fee Case Against DENSO International

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

The Sixth Circuit recently granted an employer win in an ERISA excessive fee case when it affirmed the dismissal of a proposed class action brought by current and former employees of DENSO International America, Inc., a...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Sixth Circuit Reverses Dismissal of ERISA Healthcare Fee Suit Against Third-Party Administrator

Holland & Knight LLP on

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

Carlton Fields

Considerations for Plan Sponsors in the Wake of Cunningham v. Cornell

Carlton Fields on

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

Maynard Nexsen

Navigating Increased ERISA Litigation Risk Post-Cunningham: How to Protect Your Plan

Maynard Nexsen on

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

Holland & Hart - The Benefits Dial

Truck on Fire … Supreme Court Relaxes ERISA Pleading Standards

by Alex Smith The Supreme Court recently issued a decision regarding the pleading standards for ERISA prohibited transactions claims in a case involving Cornell’s 403(b) plan to resolve a federal circuit court split. Under...more

Ropes & Gray LLP

Plan Sponsors Beware: The U.S. Supreme Court Just Eased Requirements to File ERISA Prohibited Transaction Suits

Ropes & Gray LLP on

Many sponsors and fiduciaries of ERISA retirement plans had been hoping that the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Cunningham v. Cornell University (No. 23-1007) would articulate new pleading standards that would slow the...more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

SCOTUS Holds ERISA Requires No Additional Pleading Requirements beyond § 1106 Elements for Prohibited-Transaction Claims,...

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

On April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court of the United States clarified the pleading requirements to bring a prohibited-transaction claim under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) in Cunningham v....more

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP

Supreme Court lowers pleading standard for ERISA prohibited transaction claims

The US Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision on April 17, 2025 that could have a lasting impact on retirement plan litigation. The decision in Cunningham v. Cornell University clarifies that when plaintiffs bring...more

Jackson Lewis P.C.

Supreme Court Clarifies ERISA Prohibited Transaction Pleading Standards

Jackson Lewis P.C. on

On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a unanimous opinion, resolved a circuit split and established a plaintiff-friendly pleading standard for ERISA prohibited transaction claims in Cunningham v. Cornell University,...more

DLA Piper

Supreme Court Opens the Door to Increased ERISA Litigation

DLA Piper on

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

Littler

The Supreme Court Relieves ERISA Plaintiffs of a Pleading Requirement: What’s Next for ERISA Plan Fiduciaries?

Littler on

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

Husch Blackwell LLP

Supreme Court Decision Means Defense of ERISA Prohibited Transaction Claims Just Got More Difficult and More Protracted

Husch Blackwell LLP on

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

Groom Law Group, Chartered

Cunningham v. Cornell: Supreme Court Lowers Bar for ERISA 406(a) Claims

On April 17, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled in Cunningham v. Cornell University that, to state a claim under ERISA section 406(a), plaintiffs need only allege the elements contained in section 406(a). Prior to the Supreme...more

Groom Law Group, Chartered

One Court Permits Tobacco Premium Surcharge Claims to Proceed Beyond the Pleading Stage, While Dispositive Motions Remain Pending...

In fall 2024, plaintiffs filed a wave of putative class action lawsuits against employers challenging wellness programs that impose a health coverage premium surcharge on participants if they do use tobacco or do not complete...more

Miller Canfield

ERISA in the Supreme Court: Implications of Cunningham v Cornell University

Miller Canfield on

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

A&O Shearman

Supreme Court’s Cornell decision sets low pleading bar for ERISA claims

A&O Shearman on

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

Proskauer - Employee Benefits & Executive...

Supreme Court Establishes Lower Pleading Standard for Prohibited Transaction Claims

In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Cunningham v. Cornell University that plaintiffs can satisfy the requirements for pleading prohibited party-in interest transactions under ERISA section 406(a) without...more

Kilpatrick

The Supreme Court Delivers Troubling Decision for ERISA Excess Fee Cases

Kilpatrick on

On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion that has the potential to make it more difficult for defendants to have excess fee cases for 401(k) or 403(b) plans dismissed at an early stage of...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Supreme Court Lowers Bar to Pleading Prohibited Transactions, Despite “Serious Concerns” of Meritless Litigation

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

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

Saul Ewing LLP

The Friday Five: Five ERISA Litigation Highlights - April 2025

Saul Ewing LLP on

The April Friday Five covers cases determining futility of exhausting administrative remedies, the nuances of the pre-existing condition exclusion, ERISA preemption, and genuine issue of material fact over an employee’s...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Split Decisions on Standing: Courts Diverge on Pension Risk Transfer Class Actions

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Two courts. Two opposite rulings. One critical question: Do plaintiffs have standing to challenge pension risk transfers under ERISA?...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

First Rulings on Pension Risk Transfer — ERISA Class Actions Reach Opposite Conclusions on Article III Standing

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

The first two district court opinions deciding whether plaintiffs have Article III standing to challenge pension risk transfers have reached opposite conclusions. One case will proceed to discovery, and the other has been...more

61 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide