Episode 133
Opinion Summary: Cunningham v. Cornell University | Date Decided: 4/17/25 | Case No. 23-1007
Case Info: Cunningham v. Cornell University | Date Decided: 4/17/25 | Case No. 23-1007
Link to Docket: Here.
Question Presented: Whether a plaintiff can state a claim by alleging that a plan fiduciary engaged in a transaction constituting a furnishing of goods, services, or facilities between the plan and a party in interest, as proscribed by 29 U.S.C. § 1106(a)(1)(C), or whether a plaintiff must plead and prove additional elements and facts not contained in the provision's text.
Holding: To state a claim under §1106(a)(1)(C), a plaintiff need only plausibly allege the elements contained in that provision itself, without addressing potential §1108 exemptions.
Result: Reversed and remanded.
Voting Breakdown: Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Justice Alito filed a concurring opinion, in which Justice Thomas and Justice Kavanaugh joined.
Link to Opinion: Here.
Advocates:
- For petitioners: Xiao Wang, Charlottesville, Va.; and Yaira Dubin, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)
- For respondents: Nicole A. Saharsky, Washington, D.C.
Website Link to Oral Argument: Here.
Apple Podcast Link to Oral Argument: Here.