Nell Cormack, JD ’25, accepts the Brian J. Dougherty Memorial Award with Professor Emeritus Norman Stein at the American College of Employee Benefits Counsel’s Annual Dinner and Induction Ceremony.

At its Nov. 8, 2025, ceremony, the American College of Employee Benefits Counsel (ACEBC) honored two alumni of Drexel University’s Thomas R. Kline School of Law. Molly Pratzner, JD ’25, and Nell Cormack, JD ’25, were recognized for student-written projects that address complex issues in employee benefits law.

Pratzner collaborated with Susan Rees, Of Counsel at The Wagner Law Group. They received the ACEBC Simplification Award for their joint project, “Proposing a Default QDRO Provision to Simplify the Division of Retirement Plan Benefits as Marital Assets in Divorce.” Cormack received the Brian J. Dougherty Memorial Award in the 21st annual ACEBC Employee Benefits Writing Competition for her paper, “The 10% Additional Tax on Early Distributions for Retirement Plans: Sound Policy or a Penalty for Being Poor?”

The ACEBC sponsors several competitive recognition programs each year that reflect different aspects of employee benefits law, including both scholarship and practice. The Simplification Award focuses on proposals that address administrative or regulatory complexity in employee benefits law and has historically attracted submissions from experienced practitioners in the field. The Employee Benefits Writing Competition has been held for more than two decades and draws student submissions from law schools across the country.

Submissions across these programs are reviewed by committees of senior employee benefits attorneys, many of whom have extensive experience in private practice and government service. Reviewers evaluate submissions through a multi-stage review process that includes close reading and comparative assessment. According to Drexel Kline Professor Emeritus Norman P. Stein, who taught both alumni, submissions are considered by senior practitioners with a focus on how effectively student work engages real policy and practice questions.

“Across these programs, reviewers are looking for work that is analytically rigorous, clearly written, and grounded in real policy or practice questions,” Stein said. “The strongest student projects reflect careful research and close attention to how the law operates in practice.”

Student submissions are evaluated alongside proposals from experienced attorneys and professionals, reflecting the ACEBC’s emphasis on ideas that can contribute meaningfully to broader policy and practice discussions within the field.

Pratzner’s project addresses the division of retirement assets during divorce, a process that often requires multiple layers of court and plan administrator review. The proposal outlines a standard Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) framework for individual account plans, such as 401(k)s, to reduce procedural complexity and costs. Developed in collaboration with Rees during Pratzner’s time as a student, the framework preserves the option for court involvement while offering a clearer default approach when parties do not seek individualized orders.

Pratzner said her interest in the proposal grew out of concerns about how legal complexity can disadvantage individuals navigating divorce.

“The process is so complicated, and it often leaves people at a real disadvantage,” Pratzner said. “I think it’s important to make the law easier to understand and more accessible, rather than harder.”

She added that the possibility of real-world application shaped how she approached the work.

“This wasn’t just a paper for class,” she said. “There was a sense that the proposal could actually move forward and have an impact, which made the work feel especially meaningful.”

Cormack’s paper examines the 10% additional tax applied to early withdrawals from retirement plans. Her analysis considers how the penalty operates in practice, particularly for individuals who access retirement savings due to financial hardship. She questions whether the tax functions as intended when considering its real-world effects.

Cormack said her research focused on the gap between the policy’s stated goals and how the tax operates in practice.

“Most people take money out of their retirement accounts because they’re experiencing serious financial hardship,” Cormack said. “In those situations, a 10% penalty doesn’t really deter the behavior. It just adds another burden.”

Through legislative history and empirical research, she evaluated whether the policy achieves its intended purpose.

“A big part of the analysis was comparing what Congress said the tax was supposed to do with what actually happens,” she said. “When you look at the data, the impact falls hardest on people who often don’t have access to financial or legal guidance.”

Photos by David Bruno