PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Benefits Companion - Best Practices for Reducing ERISA Litigation Risk
ERISA Claims: How Can Benefits Be An Employer’s Burden?
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 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
In Central States, Se. & W. Areas Pension Fund v. Laguna Dairy, S. de R.L. de C.V., No. 23-3206 (3d Cir. 2025 Mar. 27, 2025), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit (“Third Circuit”) reversed the district...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 Supreme Court resolved a circuit split on the appropriate pleading standard for a specific type of prohibited transaction claim under ERISA. While that decision may sound dry and technical, the...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
ERISA breach of fiduciary duty class actions have surged in recent years, prompting courts to grapple with complex questions about how these claims should be pleaded and litigated. Among the most consequential and unresolved...more
On Labor Day, September 2, 1974, Gerald Ford signed the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) into law. ERISA governs the employee benefit plans (i.e., retirement and welfare plans) of most private employers in...more
The April Friday Five covers cases determining futility of exhausting administrative remedies, the nuances of the pre-existing condition exclusion, ERISA preemption, and genuine issue of material fact over an employee’s...more
Two courts. Two opposite rulings. One critical question: Do plaintiffs have standing to challenge pension risk transfers under ERISA?...more
On March 10, 2024, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in a much-followed putative class action lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson (“J&J”) alleging that the plan fiduciaries for J&J’s group health plan violated ERISA by...more
Since we last discussed environmental, social, and corporate governance (“ESG”) developments in the context of ERISA retirement plans, ESG litigation has taken a rather unexpected turn. Although the plan lineup in Spence v....more
In late October 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ruled in Romano v. Hancock Life Insurance Company, F.4th 729 (11th Cir. 2024) that certain foreign tax credits that were generated as a result...more
There is this scene in Donnie Brasco when the crew has to make their take for the week and they try to hammer a New York City parking meter for the coins. This reminds me of certain ERISA litigators looking for more plan...more
In Hutchins v. HP Inc., the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed – with prejudice – the plaintiff's claims challenging the use of forfeited employer 401(k) contributions. This is the latest...more
The most recent wave of ERISA litigation is focused on the use of plan forfeitures in 401(k) plans, with the newest case, Armenta v. WillScot Mobile Mini Holdings Corp. being filed just last week. Although, for years, many...more
On January 10th, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas (the court) ruled that American Airlines, Inc. (American) and the American Airlines Employee Benefits Committee (together, the Defendants)...more
Many employer-sponsored defined contributions plans, including 401(k) profit sharing plans and money purchase pension plans include a vesting schedule – a period over which a plan participant earns a nonforfeitable right to...more
On January 10, 2025, Judge Reed O’Connor of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas ruled, following a four-day bench trial, that an airline breached ERISA fiduciary duties when investing...more