Wise v. Verizon Communications 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 state law claims predicated on 7 “theories of fraud, misrepresentation, and negligence” are preempted because they “depend on the 8 existence of an ERISA-covered plan to demonstrate that [the plaintiff] suffered damages”
• holding that 2 state-law claims predicated on “theories of fraud, misrepresentation, and negligence” are 3 preempted under Section 514(a) because they “depend on the existence of an ERISA-covered plan 4 to demonstrate that [the plaintiff] suffered damages”
• holding that 4 state-law claims predicated on “theories of fraud, misrepresentation, and negligence” are 5 preempted under Section 514(a) because they “depend on the existence of an ERISA-covered plan 6 to demonstrate that [the plaintiff] suffered damages”
• holding that 12 state-law claims predicated on “theories of fraud, misrepresentation, and negligence” are 13 preempted under Section 514(a) because they “depend on the existence of an ERISA-covered plan 14 to demonstrate that [the plaintiff] suffered damages”
• stating that a plaintiff 11 “may not resort to this equitable catchall provision to seek the same relief” under another 12 ERISA provision
• espousing the federal policy to apply the longer limitations period \[w]hen choosing between multiple potentially-applicable statutes\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).