Skip to main content
Second Circuit· 9/9/1993

Krishna v. Colgate Palmolive Co.

Citations

  • 7 F.3d 11
  • 1993 WL 380023

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that it would be counterproductive to require the plan administrator to delve into state law concerning domestic relations to determine plan beneficiaries
  • noting the “strong interest in uniform, uncomplicated .administration of ERISA plans.”
  • noting the “strong interest in uniform, uncomplicated administration of ERISA plans.”
  • “In developing federal common law, ... resort may be had to state law in a proper case.”
  • where ERISA is silent on issue, the federal court may resort to state law to assist in the development of federal common law
  • “Because the designation of beneficiaries to this life insurance policy ‘relates to’ the ERISA plan, the preemption provision applies.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Lumbard, Mahoney, Winter

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

58 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

28 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.