Chicago District Council of Carpenters Welfare Fund v. Caremark, Incorporated and Caremark Rx, Incorporated

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a PBM did not owe a fiduciary duty based on the terms of its contract with a union health plan
• holding that Caremark could not be an ERISA fiduciary because Carpenters retained for itself the final authority to control and administer its plan
• concluding that the district court properly relied upon contracts attached to the complaint even when the contracts contradicted the complaint
• concluding that PBM was not fiduciary for purposes of negotiating prices with drug retailers
• holding service provider owed no fiduciary duty because arm’s length bargaining produced the governing contract
• finding that “this scheme was the very deal for which Carpenters bargained at arms’ length,” and so “Caremark owed no fiduciary duty in this regard”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).