Gerosa v. Savasta & Company, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that ERISA did not preempt plan trustees’ state-law breach of contract and professional malpractice claims against an outside actuary
• “Regulating the professions, particularly under a rubric of professional malpractice, is a traditional state function.”
• “Plaintiffs have not alleged sufficient facts to make out a claim for restitution. The moneys sought by the Plaintiffs were never in [the defendant]^ possession”
• “One product of these tendencies has been that courts routinely find that garden-variety state-law malpractice or negligence claims against non-fiduciary plan ad-visors ... are not preempted.”
• “In determining the propriety of a remedy, we must look to the real nature of the relief sought, not its label.”
• issue was whether remedy sought was properly characterized as restitution, and whether § 502(a)(3) permitted money damages

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).