News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court of the United States › Fiduciary Duty

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 -
Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL

Benefits Monthly Minute - May 2025

Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL on

The May Monthly Minute brings you up-to-date on mental health parity enforcement relief, as well as smoker surcharge and prohibited transaction litigation. Nonenforcement of 2024 Mental Health Parity Regulations - Earlier...more

Kilpatrick

5 Key Takeaways | Plan Investments and Fiduciary Risk Mitigation in the Trump Era

Kilpatrick on

The landscape for retirement plan investments and fiduciary risks is shifting in the early part of the second Trump Administration, both due to changes in the administration’s policies and developments in the courts....more

Troutman Pepper Locke

SEC Briefs Disgorgement and Investor Harm in Navellier v. SEC

Troutman Pepper Locke on

In the recent Supreme Court case, Navellier & Associates, Inc. v. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the petitioners sought a writ of certiorari challenging the decisions of the lower courts regarding the scope of...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

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Do You Really Want to Be an ERISA Fiduciary?

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,... on

Two recent class action lawsuits charging a breach of fiduciary duty under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) have increased the stakes and raised important considerations regarding a plan fiduciary’s duty of...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

Ary Rosenbaum - The Rosenbaum Law Firm P.C.

Cornell case makes it easier for plan participants to sue

Ary Rosenbaum - The Rosenbaum Law Firm P.C. on

For years, I observed that federal courts were growing weary of cases involving fee litigation, but then the Supreme Court changed that perspective....more

Pullman & Comley - Labor, Employment and...

Employee Benefit Plan Fiduciaries: Why Solid Fee Benchmarking Should Be On Your To-Do List

Pullman & Comley - Labor, Employment and... on

Certain transactions between employee benefit plans and “parties in interest” are prohibited under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA). ...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

Lowenstein Sandler LLP

Supreme Court Ruling Makes It Easier for Participants To Sue Plan Fiduciaries

Lowenstein Sandler LLP on

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

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

Carlton Fields

DOL ESG Rule Withstands Demolition of Chevron Deference

Carlton Fields on

In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the U.S. Supreme Court knocked down Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council Inc., leaving the doctrine of Chevron deference in rubble. The doctrine stated that, when a...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

Holland & Knight LLP

Supreme Court Ruling Eases Path for ERISA Prohibited Transaction Claims

Holland & Knight LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court on April 17, 2025, issued a greatly anticipated decision in which the justices unanimously held that plaintiffs alleging a prohibited transaction under Section 1106(a)(1)(C) of the Employee Retirement...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

310 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 13
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