550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 279,246 times 369 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations of conduct that are merely consistent with wrongdoing do not state a claim unless "placed in a context that raises a suggestion of" such wrongdoing
463 U.S. 1 (1983) Cited 10,649 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that a case may not be removed to federal court on the basis of a preemption defense even where "both parties admit that the defense is the only question truly at issue in the case"
530 U.S. 238 (2000) Cited 551 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that the authorization under 29 U.S.C. § 1132 "extends to a suit against a nonfiduciary 'party in interest' to a transaction barred by [29 U.S.C. § 1106]"
Holding that a plan exists, whether "pursuant to a writing or not," where "a reasonable person could ascertain the intended benefits, beneficiaries, source of financing, and procedures for receiving benefits"
Holding that a hospital had an independent breach of contract action against the insurer because “the dispute here is not over the right to payment, which might be said to depend on the patients' assignments to the Providers, but the amount, or level, of payment, which depends on the terms of the provider agreements” (emphasis in original; quotation marks and alterations omitted)
Holding that, although the statutes do not specify an exhaustion requirement, the legislative history and text of the statutes show that Congress intended to grant the courts authority to apply an exhaustion requirement in ERISA cases