Mixed results from Courts of Appeals on ERISA preemption

In recent weeks, U.S. Courts of Appeals have provided mixed results when determining whether state laws were superseded (i.e., preempted) by ERISA. Several Circuit Courts of Appeals recently held that a number of state laws that impacted ERISA plans were not preempted by ERISA, while some courts held that other state laws were not.

A number of U.S. Courts of Appeals have recently examined when ERISA preempts state laws. The Sixth Circuit found in Self-Insurance Institute of America, Inc. v. Snyder that a state law imposing a tax on claims paid by plans, including self-insured plans, was not preempted by ERISA. Similarly, the Third Circuit held in New Jersey Carpenters v. Tishman that a state’s prevailing wage law was not preempted. The Second Circuit found in Wurtz v. The Rawlings Company that a state law that addressed subrogation and reimbursement was preempted for self-funded health plans, but not for fully insured plans. Finally, the First Circuit held in Merit Construction Alliance v. City of Quincy that a state law requiring the maintenance of an ERISA program was preempted.

ERIC members and trial members can read more here.
SIIA v. Snyder is available here.
New Jersey Carpenters v. Tishman is available here.
Wurtz v. The Rawlings Company is available here.
Merit Construction Alliance v. City of Quincy is available here.