563 U.S. 421 (2011) Cited 1,109 times 101 Legal Analyses
Holding that SPDs provide "communication with beneficiaries about the plan, but . . . do not themselves constitute the terms of the plan for purposes of § 502(B)"
530 U.S. 211 (2000) Cited 1,354 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that there was "jurisdiction regardless of the correctness of the removal" because the "amended complaint alleged ERISA violations, over which the federal courts have jurisdiction"
Holding that the "conclusory allegation that the Sheriff’s Office was ‘on notice’ of the need to ‘promulgate, implement, and/or oversee’ policies pertaining to the ‘use of force’ " was insufficient when the claim arose from a single incident involving two deputies
530 U.S. 238 (2000) Cited 547 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]"
573 U.S. 409 (2014) Cited 308 times 61 Legal Analyses
Holding that a motion to dismiss in an ERISA case "requires careful judicial consideration of whether the complaint states a claim that the defendant has acted imprudently" and declining to adopt a defendant-friendly presumption