News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Motion to Dismiss

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

TCPA Tracker: April-June 2025

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP on

On June 20, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a district court in an enforcement proceeding is not bound by an agency’s pre-enforcement interpretation of a statute. Rather, as the Court held in McLaughlin Chiropractic...more

Verrill

Preparing for “Untoward Practical Results”—Implications and Action Items for ERISA Attorneys Following Cunningham v. Cornell...

Verrill on

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

Troutman Amin LLP

THE DEATH OF PRESUMPTION: Are Cell Phones Still “Residential” Post McLaughlin?

Troutman Amin LLP on

The TCPA landscape is being reshaped in real time and we’re here to bear witness. With the Supreme Court’s decision in McLaughlin Chiropractic Assocs. v. McKesson Corp., No. 23-1226, 2025 U.S. LEXIS 2385 (June 20, 2025), the...more

Paul Hastings LLP

The Verdict Is In: SuperValu Wins at Trial Despite Knowingly Submitting False Claims

Paul Hastings LLP on

In 2023, we wrote about the Supreme Court’s decision in United States ex. rel. Schutte v. SuperValu Inc. interpreting the False Claims Act’s (FCA) scienter standard to require inquiry into a defendant’s subjective knowledge....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

Venable LLP

Final Means Final: Supreme Court Reaffirms Strict Limits on Post-Judgment Amendments

Venable LLP on

When is a final judgment not final? In an opinion by Justice Thomas unanimously reversing the Second Circuit, the Supreme Court reaffirmed on June 5 that the bar for reopening a final judgment under the catchall provision in...more

Fisher Phillips

Retirement Plan Fiduciaries Must Adjust to New Era of ERISA Litigation: How a Recent SCOTUS Ruling and $39M Jury Award Changed the...

Fisher Phillips on

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

Jones Day

U.S. Supreme Court Encourages Federal Rule 7(a)(7) Replies—A Potential Boon for Defendants

Jones Day on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently reminded district courts that they may use Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(a)(7)—a little-known rule—to screen out meritless complaints before discovery....more

Wiley Rein LLP

Supreme Court Blocks Mexico’s Gun Lawsuit: PLCAA Shields U.S. Firearm Makers from Litigation

Wiley Rein LLP on

On June 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court held unanimously, in Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos, that the gun-manufacturer and gun-distributor defendants sued by Mexico for negligence and related torts...more

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP

Supreme Court Denies Review of Statute of Limitations for Section 1981 Discrimination Claims

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on

On June 2, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the appeal of a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision interpreting the limitations period for filing lawsuits under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866. ...more

Robinson Bradshaw

Lower Pleading Standard for 401(k) Plan Prohibited Transaction Suits

Robinson Bradshaw on

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

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

Polsinelli

Supreme Court Revives ERISA Litigation Dismissed in Second Circuit: Will the Supreme Court’s Adoption of a Liberal Pleading...

Polsinelli on

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

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

King & Spalding

Cunningham v. Cornell University: ERISA Claims Are Now Much More Costly and Difficult to Defend

King & Spalding on

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

Holland & Hart - The Benefits Dial

Truck on Fire … Supreme Court Relaxes ERISA Pleading Standards

Holland & Hart - The Benefits Dial on

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

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP on

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

Groom Law Group, Chartered on

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

Vedder Price

Cunningham v. Cornell University

Vedder Price on

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

160 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 7
Next »

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide