WADSWORTH, ADMINISTRATOR, NEW HAMPSHIRE EMPLOYERS' BENEFIT TRUST ET AL.
v.
WHALAND, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE; AND DAWSON, ADMINISTRATOR, NORTHERN NEW ENGLAND CARPENTERS HEALTH AND WELFARE FUND ET AL. V. WHALAND, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
WADSWORTH, ADMINISTRATOR, NEW HAMPSHIRE EMPLOYERS' BENEFIT TRUST ET AL.
WHALAND, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE; AND DAWSON, ADMINISTRATOR, NORTHERN NEW ENGLAND CARPENTERS HEALTH AND WELFARE FUND ET AL. V. WHALAND, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
435 U.S. 980
Supreme Court of the United States (1978)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 19 cases
Opinion
Full opinion text not available for this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (19 total)
-
Blue Cross & Blue Shield OF Fla., Inc. v. Matthews, 473 So. 2d 831 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…t is “the result of a congressional endeavor to curb the funding and disclosure abuses of employee pension and welfare benefit plans by establishing minimum federal standards.” Wadsworth v. Whaland, 562 F. 2d 70, 73-74 (1st Cir.1977),6 cert. denied, 435 U.S. 980, 98 S.Ct. [*835] 1630, 56 L.Ed.2d 72 (1978). As a result, ERISA “imposes upon pension plans a variety of substantive requirements relating to participation, funding, and vesting.” Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Massachusetts, — U.S. -, -, 105 S.…
-
Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Massachusetts, 471 U.S. 724 (U.S. 1985)…ated-benefit statutes are not preserved by the insurance saving clause. See S. 209, 96th Cong., 1st Sess., 125 Cong. Rec. 933, 937 (1979). The bill was intended to overrule the decision in Wadsworth v. Whaland, 562 F. 2d 70 (CA1 1977), cert. denied, 435 U. S. 980 (1978), holding that the saving clause saved a New Hampshire mandated-benefit law. See 125 Cong. Rec. 947 (1979) (remarks of Sen. Javits). The bill was reported to the Senate, but died without being debated. See Senate Committee on Labor and Human R…
-
Dependahl v. Falstaff Brewing Corp., 653 F.2d 1208 (8th Cir. 1981)…so, Congress preempted all state laws which relate to employee benefit plans, not only state laws which directly attempt to regulate an area expressly covered by ERISA. Wadsworth v. Whaland, 562 F. 2d 70, 77 (1st Cir. 1977) (Lay, J.), cert. denied, 435 U.S. 980, 98 S.Ct. 1630, 56 L.Ed.2d 72 (1978). Congress “meant to establish pension plan regulation as exclusively a federal concern,” limited only by the terms of ERISA itself. Alessi v. RaybestosManhattan, Inc., - U.S. at —-, 101 S.Ct. at 1906 (footnote om…
Previewing 3 of 19 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence