Wedgwood v. United States

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 a plan trustee’s state-law professional negligence and fraud claims brought against an external benefit plan consultant
• concluding that trustee’s common law suit against outside financial consultant is not preempted
• concluding that trustee’s common-law suit against outside financial consultant is not preempted
• reasoning that “relations between one or more ÍERISA1 plan entities and an outside party * * * escape preemption”
• finding no preemption because the suit involved an “allegedly negligent third-party service providers,” as opposed to a conflict between principals, like fhe employer and plan fiduciary
• “Plaintiffs' state law claims against [defendant] do not have and will not have any effect whatsoever on the relations among the traditional plan entities.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).