No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
ERISA: No Preemption of State's HMO Law Requiring Independent Physician Review
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2021
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of Law, Medicine and Ethics 2000
References
No. 99–2574, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 26053 (7th Cir. Oct. 19, 1999).Google Scholar
Employee Retirement Income Security Act 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. (2000).Google Scholar
215 Ill. Comp. Stat. 125/1–1 et seq.Google Scholar
See id. at *16.Google Scholar
See id. at *16.Google Scholar
See id. at *17.Google Scholar
See 481 U.S. 58, 67 (1987) (holding that a state common-law action, preempted by the civil enforcement provisions of ERISA, arose under federal law and was removable to federal court).Google Scholar
See Moran, , at *21.Google Scholar
See id. at *21; 29 U.S.C. § 1144(b)(2)(A).Google Scholar
See Moran, , at *24–25.Google Scholar
See Moran, , at *27.Google Scholar
See FMC Corp. v. Holliday, 498 U.S. at 64.Google Scholar
See Pilot Life Insurance Co. v. Dedeaux, 481 U.S. 41, 57 (1987) (holding that the language, structure, and legislative history of ERISA required the conclusion that its civil enforcement provisions were meant to establish an exclusive remedy for violations related to employee benefit plans).Google Scholar
See 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B)Google Scholar
See Moran, , at *33.Google Scholar
See Moran, , at *34.Google Scholar
Id. at *38–39.Google Scholar
Id. at *39.Google Scholar
Id. at *39.Google Scholar
Id. at *41.Google Scholar