Challenges to an ERISA plan’s right to reimbursement are properly characterized as ERISA §502(a) claims; under §502, asserted remedies and causes of action that conflict with ERISA’s civil enforcement scheme are deemed preempted. When a claim is removed from state to federal court, the state law claim is reconfigured as a federal ERISA cause of action; §514 expressly preempts state laws that relate to any employee benefit plan but saves from preemption any state law that regulates insurance, banking, or securities. If a case is properly before a federal court under §502, then a state statute that is saved from preemption under §514 and does not conflict with §502, can supply the relevant rule of decision.
Rudel v. Hawai’i Management Alliance Association - filed Sept. 11, 2019
Cite as 2019 S.O.S. 17-17395
For more information, go to:
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment