Here, plaintiffs’ claims regarding defendants’ alleged post-plan misfeasance are not preempted. As in Paulsen, plaintiffs’ state law claims run to non-fiduciary service providers and do not relate to the plan, its administration, or its benefits. The …
As the district court correctly noted, ERISA preempts “any and all State laws insofar as they may now or hereafter relate to any employee benefit plan described in section 1003(a) of this title and not …
“It is not the label placed on a state law claim that determines whether it is preempted, but whether in essence such a claim is for the recovery of an ERISA plan benefit.”Lockett v. Marsh …
While similar to the Butero test, Davila refines Butero by inquiring about the existence of a separate legal duty, which is not a consideration under Butero. Moreover, a number of other circuits have recognized Davila’s …
Plaintiffs argue that Medical Mutual, in its processing of insurance claims, violated the federal RICO statute. Specifically, Plaintiffs allege that Medical Mutual “acted to delay, diminish and deny payment of . . . lawful claims …
The Supreme Court has not prescribed a standard for determining whether a state law sufficiently constrains an EBP’s decision-making in an area of ERISA concern that the law is pre-empted, but it has indicated a …
The Supreme Court has not prescribed a standard for determining whether a state law sufficiently constrains an EBP’s decision-making in an area of ERISA concern that the law is pre-empted, but it has indicated a …
The Court finds that plaintiffs’ claims against Hillyer do not fall within the scope of ERISA § 502(a) because they do not implicate a relationship governed by ERISA and because their resolution does not require …