SCOTUS holds ERISA complainants need not provide extra proof to show prohibited conduct

SCOTUS holds ERISA complainants need not provide extra proof to show prohibited conduct

A unanimous court held that such proof was the burden of the defense — but also raised potential issues that could follow their decision.

Supreme Court Establishes Lower Pleading Standard for Prohibited Transaction Claims

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 alleging facts disproving the availability of a statutory exemption for such transactions, such as where no more than reasonable compensation is paid for necessary services. No. 23-1007 (U.S. Apr. 17, 2025). As a result, pla…

Joanne Roskey Comments on Supreme Court's Cornell ERISA Ruling and Impact on Employer Litigation Risk in Law360 | Miller & Chevalier

News khospital3 Mon, 04/21/2025 - 14:32 Featured On Publication Name Law360 Include Disclaimer Off News Type News Subtitle "High Court's Cornell Ruling Eases Path for ERISA Suits" Date 04.18.2025 Description Joanne Roskey, former Deputy Associate Solicitor at the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) and former Chief of the Division of Health Investigations in DOL's Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), was quoted on the U.S. Supreme…