New York State Conference of Blue Cross & Blue Shield Plans v. Travelers Insurance

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 preempts state laws that mandate particular employee benefits structures or their administration
• ruling that ERISA cannot be read “as displacing all state laws affecting costs and charges on the theory that they indirectly relate to ERISA plans”
• holding that the phrase “relates to” should be interpreted to limit the breadth of ERISA
• holding that a statute did not \refer to\ ERISA plans because it operated regardless of whether the medical coverage was secured by an ERISA plan or otherwise
• concluding that \[t]he basic thrust of the pre-emption clause [is] to avoid a multiplicity of regulation in order to permit the nationally uniform administration of employee benefit plans\
• recognizing that Con- gress has \sought to encourage . . . state responses to growing health care costs and the widely diverging availability of health services\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).