Notarantonio v. Reall

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the challenged law could not “function[] irrespective of . . . the existence of an ERISA plan” because it “affect[ed] ERISA plans”
• “Where a State law is preempted because it has a prohibited ‘reference to’ ERISA or ERISA plans, we need not reach the question of whether it is also preempted under the ‘connection with’ prong of the analysis.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).