Rush Prudential HMO vs. Moran, Debra

Year: 2000
Court: U.S. Supreme Court
Case Number: 00-1021

ERISA’S saving clause must defeat a claim that the law is pre-empted because it provides a remedy other than those set forth in ERISA section 502.

UP’s brief was written pro bono by Arnold R. Levinson and Terrence J. Coleman of Pillsbury & Levinson, LLP. Of Counsel: Amy Bach, Esq.

 


The information presented in this publication is for general informational purposes and is not a substitute for legal advice. If you have a specific legal issue or problem, United Policyholders recommends that you consult with an attorney. Guidance on hiring professional help can be found in the “Find Help” section of www.uphelp.org. United Policyholders does not sell insurance or certify, endorse or warrant any of the insurance products, vendors, or professionals identified on our website.

Source: https://uphelp.org/amicus-briefs/rush-prudential-hmo-vs-moran-debra/
Date: July 21, 2024