← 350 F. Supp. 2d 739 - Williams v. Smith

350 F. Supp. 2d 739 - Williams v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

cited by 1 later decisions

November 2012

most recently cited

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1447 · 29 U.S.C. § 1001 (§ 2 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1002 (§ 3 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1144 (§ 514 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)

Relies on Ellis v. Liberty Life Assurance Co. of Boston · Giles v. NYLCare Health Plans, Inc. · Hubbard v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield Ass'n · Hobson v. Robinson

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

“A state cause of action relates to an employee benefit plan whenever it has “a connection with or reference to such plan.” Hubbard v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield Assoc., 42 F.3d 942, 945 (5th Cir. 1995) (citations omitted). To determine whether a claim is preempted by ERISA, the Fifth Circuit has directed application of a two-prong test, which asks: “(1) whether the claim addresses areas of exclusive federal concern and not of traditional state authority, such as the right to receive benefits under the terms of an ERISA plan, and (2) whether the claim directly affects the relationship among traditional ERISA entities-the employer, the plan and its fiduciaries, and the participants and beneficiaries.” Hobson v. Robinson, 75 Fed. Appx. 949, 953, 2003 WL 22183558 , (5th Cir.2003).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. 908 F. Supp. 2d 809 - Sherman v. Lexington Concrete & Block Co.

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.