News & Analysis as of

Pleading Standards Supreme Court of the United States Class Action

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

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

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

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

Goodwin

Supreme Court Decides Pleading Standard to Allege ERISA Prohibited-Transaction Claims, Favoring Plaintiffs

Goodwin on

Key takeaway: The Supreme Court held that to state an ERISA prohibited-transaction claim under 29 U.S.C. § 1106(a), a plaintiff needs only to plausibly allege the elements contained in § 1106(a) itself and does not need to...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

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

The Supreme Court Update - April 17, 2025

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court of the United States issued one decision today: Cunningham v. Cornell University, No. 23-1007: This case addresses the pleading standard to assert a claim under a provision of the Employee Retirement...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

US Supreme Court Declines to Resolve Pleading Requirements for Securities Fraud Claims

In an unexpected turn of events, the U.S. Supreme Court recently dismissed without explanation two securities fraud class action cases out of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit—Facebook, Inc. v. Amalgamated Bank...more

Carr Maloney P.C.

Supreme Court Declines to Consider New Pleading Standard for Securities Fraud Claims

Carr Maloney P.C. on

On December 11, 2024, the Supreme Court dismissed NVIDIA Corporation’s appeal, allowing a class action securities fraud case to move forward towards trial. The Plaintiffs originally brought the case in the United States...more

Jones Day

United States Supreme Court to Hear Two Securities Cases This Term

Jones Day on

The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in two cases concerning the pleading standard in securities fraud class actions....more

Proskauer - Employee Benefits & Executive...

Northwestern University’s Alternative Explanations Not Strong Enough To Defeat ERISA Excessive Fee Claims

On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Seventh Circuit issued its opinion in Hughes v. Northwestern University, concluding that participants in two Northwestern 403(b) plans plausibly pled fiduciary-breach claims based on...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Inside the Courts – An Update From Skadden Securities Litigators - March 2019

This quarter’s issue includes summaries and associated court opinions of selected cases principally decided between December 2018 and February 2019....more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Inside the Courts – An Update From Skadden Securities Litigators - June 2018

This quarter’s issue includes summaries and associated court opinions of selected cases principally decided between February 2018 and May 2018. ...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Will The Supreme Court Allow Class Action Stacking?

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Parties have long argued over whether the filing of a class action tolls the statute of limitations for absent class members so that they can pursue a separate class action if the initial action fails to be certified for any...more

Bracewell LLP

High Court Underscores Injury Requirement for Statutory Class Actions

Bracewell LLP on

In a critical ruling for businesses concerned by the threat of growing class-action litigation, the Supreme Court decided on May 16, 2016 that plaintiffs must allege a concrete injury-in-fact to maintain statutory class...more

McDermott Will & Emery

ANDA Update - October 2015

McDermott Will & Emery on

Federal Circuit Interprets Statutory Requirements for Biosimilar Regulatory Pathway - Amgen Inc., v. Sandoz Inc., (Fed. Cir. July 21, 2015): In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Inside the Courts - An Update From Skadden Securities Litigators - May 2015 / Volume 7 / Issue 2

In This Issue: - U.S. Supreme Court: ..Omnicare, Inc. v. Laborers Dist. Council Constr. Indus. Pension Fund, 135 S. Ct. 1318 (4th Cir. Mar. 16, 2015) - Auditor Liability: ..In re Advanced Battery Techs.,...more

Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

Supreme Court Clarifies Class Action Removal Pleading Standard

The US Supreme Court recently held that under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), a defendant need not provide proof of the amount in controversy in its notice of removal to federal court. Only a plausible allegation is...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Dart Cherokee: SCOTUS to Hear Case on CAFA Pleading Requirements

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The Supreme Court will now decide whether a 2006 Seventh Circuit decision on Class Action Fairness Act pleading requirements was correct. The Court granted certiorari today in a case that will resolve whether defendants...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Inside The Courts - December 2013 | Volume 5 | Issue 4

In This Issue: *U.S. SUPREME COURT: - Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc., No. 13-317 (U.S. Nov. 15, 2013) Lawson v. FMR LLC, No. 12-3 (U.S. Nov. 12, 2013) - Chadbourne & Parke LLP v. Troice, No....more

Cozen O'Connor

The Material Impact of the Amgen Decision on D&O Insurance

Cozen O'Connor on

In Amgen, Inc. v. Connecticut Retirement Plans and Trust Funds, No. 11-1085 (Slip Op. Feb. 27, 2013), the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 majority opinion (Ginsburg, J.), affirmed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit’s...more

22 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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