In the Headlines
October 7, 2024

Supreme Court to Review ERISA Prohibited Transactions

Planadviser

Litigation attorney Lindsey Camp was quoted in a Planadviser article discussing the reasons behind the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to hear the Cunningham v. Cornell University case. This case delves into the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and its stipulations on prohibited transaction claims, specifically the burden of proof for plaintiffs making claims related to these transactions. Ms. Camp elaborated on the debate over whether plaintiffs must allege imprudent conduct, where retirement plans may engage in dealings that could benefit service providers or parties of interest, potentially at the plan's expense. Furthermore, she explained the Supreme Court will look at whether exemptions to prohibited transactions are implicitly included in their definitions — a key factor that could potentially reshape how future ERISA-related claims are pleaded and adjudicated.

"[The case] raises an important issue regarding the pleading requirements associated with prohibited transaction claims and whether a plaintiff has to allege any imprudent conduct associated with the allegedly prohibited transaction in the complaint," she said. 

READ: Supreme Court to Review ERISA Prohibited Transactions

Related News and Headlines