Coronavirus (COVID-19) News and Resources
Coronavirus (COVID-19) Webcasts
Subscribe to Free Daily Newsletters
Post a Job

Featured Jobs

New Business Consultant

Retirement Plan Consultants
(Telecommute / CO / IA / IL / IN / KS / MN / MO / ND / NE / OH / OK / SD / WI / WY)

Retirement Plan Consultants logo

Retirement Plan Administrator

SPS
(Telecommute)

SPS logo

Retirement Plan Administrator

Group RHI
(Telecommute / Spring TX / Dallas TX / University Place WA)

Group RHI logo

Client Success Team Leader

Ubiquity Retirement + Savings
(Telecommute / San Francisco CA / AL / AZ / CO / DC / FL / IL / KY / LA / MA / NC / NJ / NV / NY / OR / SC / TN / TX / WA)

Ubiquity Retirement + Savings logo

Implementation Specialist

Ubiquity Retirement + Savings
(San Francisco CA / AL / AZ / CO / DC / FL / IL / KY / LA / MA / NC / NJ / NV / NY / OR / SC / TN / TX / WA)

Ubiquity Retirement + Savings logo

Director of Regulatory Affairs

Health Plans Inc
(Westborough MA)

Health Plans Inc logo

Defined Contribution Plan Administrator

MGKS
(Phoenix AZ)

MGKS logo

Retirement Plan Administrator

Steidle Pension Solutions, LLC
(Lebanon NJ)

Steidle Pension Solutions, LLC logo

Free Daily News and Jobs

“BenefitsLink continues to be the most valuable resource we have at the firm.”

-- An attorney subscriber

Get the BenefitsLink app LinkedIn
Twitter
Facebook

<< Previous news item   |   Next news item >>



Text of Federal District Court Opinion: ERISA Preempts State Law Claim of Insurer Attempting to Recover Duplicative Benefit Payments (PDF)
U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey Link to more items from this source
Sept. 23, 2014
"No matter how MetLife frames its arguments, both of MetLife's proposed state law claims are premised upon and require a finding that MetLife was not required, under the Plan's terms, to make the optional coverage benefit payment.... Although a state law claim that only 'requires a cursory examination of plan provisions' or arises in the context of an ERISA plan, may not be preempted by Section 514(a), the proposed state law claims in this case clearly arise from an ERISA plan, direct the Court's inquiry to the Plan, require an analysis of the Plan 's terms, and involve the calculation and payment of benefits due to a Plan participant. Therefore, MetLife's proposed state law claims are preempted by Section 514(a)." [Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. DePalo, No. 13-3092 (D.N.J. Sept. 22, 2014)]

Please click here to report this link if it is broken (for example, if you see a "404 File Not Found" error message after you click on the link above).
An important word about authorship: BenefitsLink® is providing a hypertext link to the item shown above, but is not the author of the item (unless otherwise specified).
© 2020 BenefitsLink.com, Inc.