The Legal 500

Twitter Logo Youtube Circle Icon LinkedIn Icon
Work +202 857 0620
Fax +202 659 4503

Sarah Adams

Work (202) 861-5432
Groom Law Group

Work Department

Litigation; Plan Funding and Restructuring


Sarah Adams, a principal in the firm's litigation practice group, represents ERISA plan sponsors, fiduciaries, alleged fiduciaries and service providers in all manner of litigation pertaining to ERISA plans. In particular, Ms. Adams represents defendants in stock drop, affiliated funds, imprudent investment, and 401(k) fee putative class action litigation, as well as cases involving employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs) and alleged actuarial malpractice. Ms. Adams also advises and litigates on behalf of plan sponsors in bankruptcy with respect to pension and retiree benefits issues. In addition to her litigation practice, Ms. Adams advises single and multiemployer plans with respect to funding and restructuring issues and represents targets of Department of Labor investigations. In addition to her litigation practice, Ms. Adams advises single and multiemployer plans with respect to funding and restructuring issues.  She focuses her efforts on finding solutions for very troubled multiemployer plans.  

For more information, please visit Ms. Adams's bio at:


American Bar Association


J.D., magna cum laude, University of Michigan Law School, Order of the Coif; B.A., summa cum laude, Drew University, Phi Beta Kappa.

United States: Labor and employment

ERISA litigation

Within: Next Generation Partners

Sarah Adams - Groom Law Group

Within: ERISA litigation

Groom Law Group’s Washington DC-based ERISA litigation team is involved in class actions and other complex litigation involving plan sponsors, financial services firms, investment managers, actuaries and other service providers. The ‘utterly unflappable, confident and knowledgeable’ Lars Golumbic heads the practice group, which also includes Michael Prame, who is rated for his ‘substantial knowledge in the field and ability to understand the bigger picture’. Sarah Adams and Mark Nielsen are defending Financial Engines and a number of welfare plan trustees in breach of fiduciary duty class action suits, while a team including Edward Meehan and associate Samuel Levin represented a multi-employer pension fund in a withdrawal liability arbitration valued in excess of $100m. The team is also noted for its ESOP litigation expertise.

[back to top]

Back to index

Legal Developments worldwide

Legal Developments and updates from the leading lawyers in each jurisdiction. To contribute, send an email request to
  • CommuniquĂ© on Equity Crowdfunding Is Officially Published

    By way of background, in January 2019, the Capital Markets Board (“ CMB ”) had issued an announcement on its website on the Draft CommuniquĂ© on Equity Crowdfunding [1] . The CMB has now officially published the CommuniquĂ© on Crowdfunding No. III-35/A (“ CommuniquĂ© ”), on October 3, 2019. The CommuniquĂ© entered into force as of October 3, 2019.
  • Beneficial Ownership Concept new interpretation from the Russian federal tax service

    The recent interpretative letter issued by the Russian Federal Tax Services (“FTS”) on 08th August 2019, has provided further guidance as to the application of the Beneficial Ownership Concept, further to the letter initially provided on the 12th of April 2018 which adopted a strict approach of the concept. 
  • Cyprus and Netherlands Double Tax Treaty Update

    Cyprus has concluded the negotiations for the avoidance of double taxation with the Netherlands. The double tax treaty was agreed at technocratic level in Hague. It is expected to be signed by the end of 2019 or early in 2020.
  • Vacancy - Senior Corporate Lawyer

    The Senior Corporate Lawyer, who will be reporting to Partners, will be working with both the firm’s legal team as well as the financial services team. The successful candidate will be requested to show initiative, take on certain responsibilities within the firm, work in a multinational environment and will immediately be given the opportunity to further advance their career within the law firm.

    The judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on February 26, 2019, in the “Danish Beneficial Ownership Cases”, can be perceived as a landmark on the interpretation of the Beneficial Ownership concept under the Interest and Royalties Directive (IRD) and the Parent-Subsidiary Directive (PSD).
  • Court of Justice rules on source of income for Derivative Residence applications

    On 2 October 2019, the Court of Justice delivered its judgment in Bajratari v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Directive 2004/38/EC) Case C-93/18 which concerns Chen applications and the source of funds for self-sufficiency. 
  • End of the ‘centre of life test’ in Surinder Singh cases?

    In the recent case of  ZA (Reg 9. EEA Regs; abuse of rights) Afghanistan   [2019] UKUT 281 (IAC ), the Upper Tribunal found that there is no basis in EU law for the centre of life test, as set out in Regulation 9(3)(a) of the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2016 (the “Regulations”). It further found that it is not to be applied when Judges assess  Surinder Singh  cases that appear before them.

    Italian rules on jointventures concerning public procurement and concession contracts are set out inlight of the European legal framework provided for in Directive 2014/23/EU and 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council. The European rules aim to ensurethe best use of public money so that EU citizens benefit from strategicinvestments and services at fair prices. In this context, public procurementand concessions represent key instruments that need to be regulated and standardisedin order to ensure free movement of goods, freedom of establishment and freedomto provide services.
  • Terms of employment as a sole representative

    In this article we examine the working arrangements of sole representatives, looking at the terms and conditions of employment that the Home Office will expect a sole representative to have in order to qualify as a representative of an overseas business.  
  • Can Sole Representatives Be Shareholders?

    The Immigration Rules require that an applicant for a  sole representative visa  is not “a  majority shareholder in the overseas business”.