FTC and Florida Focus on Non-Competes, SCOTUS to Rule on Pension Withdrawal Liability - #WorkforceWednesday® - Employment Law This Week®
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Forfeitures Under Fire
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Navigating Fiduciary Responsibilities in a Tide-Turning ESG Era
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Big Changes to Catch-Up Contributions in 2025
How ERISA Litigators Strengthen Plan Compliance and Risk Management: One-on-One with Jeb Gerth
Maximizing Financial Growth: Insights on HSAs and Smart Investment Strategies with Shaun Eddy
5 Key Takeaways | IRS Final RMD Rules & Proposed Regulations to Address SECURE 2.0 Act Issues
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Tax Relief and Possible Retirement Plan Resources for Hurricane Victims
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - New IRS Guidance on SECURE 2.0 Act Student Loan Employer Contributions
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - ERISA Forfeiture Litigation
La Reforma Pensional en Colombia
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Understanding Lifetime Income Products
Multiemployer Pension Plans in Mergers and Acquisitions — Troutman Pepper Podcast
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Trends in Recordkeeper Consolidation and Due Diligence
Long-Term Part-Time Employee Eligibility Rules Now in Effect — Troutman Pepper Podcast
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - What the J&J Case Means for Plan Administrators
#WorkforceWednesday: SECURE 2.0 Act - Navigating New Retirement Plan Provisions in 2024 - Employment Law This Week®
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - SECURE 2.0: Leveraging Opportunities Employees Want Most
What Can A Tax Attorney Do For You? A Podcast With Janathan Allen
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Understanding Fees in Retirement Planning
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 Supreme Court decision in April made it easier for plaintiffs to keep ERISA prohibited transaction claims in play longer, and just days later a rare ERISA trial resulted in a huge win for a class of 401(k) plan...more
In its April 17 decision in Cunningham v. Cornell University, the U.S. Supreme Court established a plaintiff-friendly standard for ERISA prohibited transaction claims, resolving a circuit court split. As a result, plan...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
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
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
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
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
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 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
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
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
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
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
The filing of a new 401(k) plan “excessive fee” or “investment underperformance” complaint is hardly “news” these days given the proliferation of suits that have been filed over the past several years. In fact, hardly a week...more
Last week, on January 24, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Hughes v. Northwestern University, unanimously holding that retirement plan fiduciaries have a duty to continuously monitor retirement...more