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 -
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

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

Proskauer - Employee Benefits & Executive... on

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

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Cunningham v. Cornell University

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

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

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

Fox Rothschild LLP

The U.S. Supreme Court Decides that Federal Courts Should Stay, Rather than Dismiss, Cases that Are Subject to Arbitration, If One...

Fox Rothschild LLP on

In May 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court decided an issue that has divided the federal courts of appeals. When the claims at issue in a federal court suit are subject to arbitration, does the court have authority to dismiss the...more

WilmerHale

Supreme Court Expands the Scope of Injuries under RICO

WilmerHale on

On April 2, 2025, the Supreme Court significantly expanded the scope of injuries entitled to treble damages under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”).  The Supreme Court held in Medical Marijuana,...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Wynn v. The Associated Press, et al.: A Recent Petition for a Writ of Certiorari Highlights Challenges to New York Times v....

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP on

The 1964 Supreme Court case New York Times v. Sullivan, which requires public officials to prove “actual malice” to succeed on a defamation claim, was a watershed moment in defamation law. Curtis Publishing Co. v. Butts was...more

Cooley LLP

On Remand From SCOTUS, Ninth Circuit Rejects Investor’s Efforts to Save Section 11 Direct Listing Claim, Holds Section 12(a)(2)...

Cooley LLP on

On February 10, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued the latest decision in Pirani v. Slack Technologies, a long-running case examining the tracing requirements under Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Alimony Terminated for Cohabitation Without a Hearing Because Recipient Refused to Cooperate with Discovery About Her Finances

Fox Rothschild LLP on

We have written a lot about termination of alimony based upon cohabitation, both before the 2014 Amendment to the alimony statute making it easier, and after the Supreme Court’s decision in the Cardali case. Typically,...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Amending Away Federal Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Holds That Federal Jurisdiction Can Be Divested by Amendment

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on

Federal courts can adjudicate state-law claims arising out of the same facts as federal-law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367, but what happens if, after removal, the plaintiff amends her complaint to remove the federal questions...more

148 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 6
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