de
buono
new
york
commissioner
health
et
al
medical
clinical
services
fund
trustees
bowers
et
argued
february
decided
june
held
section
preclude
new
york
imposing
gross
receipts
tax
erisa
funded
medical
centers
pp
second
circuit
initially
found
hfa
pre
empted
relied
substantially
expansive
literal
interpretation
words
relate
appears
adhered
approach
remand
failing
give
proper
weight
travelers
rejection
strictly
literal
reading
travelers
unequivocally
concluded
relates
language
intended
modify
starting
presumption
congress
intend
supplant
state
law
evaluating
whether
normal
presumption
pre
emption
overcome
particular
case
must
look
objectives
erisa
statute
guide
scope
state
law
congress
understood
survive
pp
following
approach
hfa
clearly
operates
field
traditionally
occupied
regulation
health
safety
matters
hillsborough
county
automated
medical
laboratories
nothing
hfa
operation
convinces
type
state
law
congress
intended
erisa
supercede
one
myriad
state
laws
general
applicability
impose
burdens
administration
erisa
plans
nevertheless
relate
within
statute
meaning
see
travelers
supposed
difference
direct
indirect
impact
upon
second
circuit
relied
distinguishing
case
travelers
withstand
scrutiny
fund
arranged
provide
medical
benefits
beneficiaries
directly
chosen
purchase
services
independently
run
hospitals
hospitals
passed
hfa
costs
onto
fund
rates
although
tax
indirect
impact
fund
decisions
relevant
respects
identical
direct
impact
felt
pp
reversed
stevens
delivered
opinion
rehnquist
kennedy
souter
ginsburg
breyer
joined
scalia
filed
dissenting
opinion
thomas
joined
notice
opinion
subject
formal
revision
publication
preliminary
print
reports
readers
requested
notify
reporter
decisions
wash
ington
typographical
formal
errors
order
corrections
may
made
preliminary
print
goes
press
barbara
de
buono
new
york
commis
sioner
health
et
petitioners
medical
clinical
services
fund
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
stevens
delivered
opinion
another
employee
retirement
income
security
act
erisa
pre
emption
case
broadly
stated
thequestion
presented
whether
hospitals
operated
erisa
plans
subject
laws
hospitals
precisely
question
whether
opaque
language
erisa
precludes
new
york
imposing
gross
receipts
tax
income
medical
centers
operated
erisa
funds
hold
new
york
may
collect
tax
faced
choice
either
curtailing
medicaid
program
generating
additional
revenue
reduce
program
deficit
new
york
general
assembly
enacted
health
facility
assessment
hfa
hfa
imposes
tax
gross
receipts
patient
services
hospitals
residential
health
care
facilities
diagnostic
treatment
centers
assessments
become
part
state
general
revenues
respondents
trustees
nysa
ila
medical
clinical
services
fund
fund
administers
self
insured
multiemployer
welfare
benefit
plan
fund
owns
operates
three
medical
centers
two
new
york
one
new
jersey
provide
medical
dental
health
care
benefits
primarilyto
longshore
workers
retirees
dependents
new
york
centers
licensed
state
diagnostic
treatment
centers
app
thus
subject
percent
tax
gross
receipts
hfa
pub
health
law
mckinney
period
january
november
respondents
paid
hfa
assessments
totaling
based
two
new
york
hospitals
patient
care
income
time
discontinued
payments
brought
action
appropriate
state
officials
petitioners
enjoin
future
assessments
obtain
refund
tax
paid
complaint
alleged
hfa
state
law
relates
fund
within
meaning
erisa
therefore
pre
empted
applied
hospitals
run
erisa
plans
district
denied
relief
concluded
hfa
pre
empted
tax
general
application
interfere
calculation
benefits
determination
employee
eligibility
benefits
thus
incidental
impact
benefit
plans
app
pet
cert
appeals
second
circuit
reversed
distinguished
cases
found
certain
laws
general
application
pre
empted
erisa
explaining
hfa
targets
health
care
industry
definition
realm
erisa
welfare
plans
must
operate
nysa
ila
medical
clinical
services
fund
axelrod
reasoned
hfa
operates
immediate
tax
payments
contributions
intended
pay
participants
medical
benefits
directly
affects
operations
functions
make
fund
provider
medical
surgical
hospital
care
participants
beneficiaries
ibid
hfa
concluded
thus
related
fundbecause
reduced
amount
fund
assets
otherwise
available
provide
plan
members
benefits
cause
plan
limit
benefits
charge
plan
members
higher
fees
first
petition
certiorari
case
filed
handed
opinion
new
york
state
conference
blue
cross
blue
shield
plans
travelers
ins
case
held
erisa
pre
empt
new
york
statute
required
hospitals
collect
surcharges
patients
covered
commercial
insurer
patients
insured
blue
shield
plan
deciding
travelers
vacated
judgment
appeals
case
remanded
consideration
light
opinion
remand
appeals
reinstated
original
judgment
distinguished
statute
involved
travelers
ground
imposing
tax
health
insurance
carriers
provided
coverage
plans
beneficiaries
indirect
economic
influence
decisions
erisa
plan
administrators
whereas
hfa
depletes
fund
assets
directly
thus
immediate
impact
operations
erisa
plan
nysa
ila
medical
clinical
services
fund
axelrod
granted
new
york
officials
second
petition
certiorari
reverse
second
circuit
initially
found
hfa
pre
empted
applied
fund
operated
hospitals
relied
substantially
expansive
literal
interpretation
words
relate
erisa
reconsidering
case
remand
appears
adhered
approach
failingto
give
proper
weight
travelers
rejection
strictly
literal
reading
travelers
earlier
cases
noted
literal
text
clearly
expansive
quite
clear
case
text
read
extend
furthest
stretch
indeterminacy
practical
purposes
pre
emption
never
run
course
eally
universally
relations
stop
nowhere
james
roderick
hudson
xli
new
york
world
classics
ibid
earlier
erisa
pre
emption
cases
necessary
rely
expansive
character
erisa
literal
language
order
find
pre
emption
state
laws
issue
cases
clear
connection
reference
shaw
delta
air
lines
erisa
benefit
plans
travelers
confronted
directly
question
whether
erisa
relates
language
intended
modify
starting
presumption
congress
intend
supplant
state
law
unequivocally
concluded
acknowledged
prior
attempt
construe
phrase
relate
give
us
much
help
drawing
line
order
toevaluate
whether
normal
presumption
pre
emption
overcome
particular
case
concluded
must
go
beyond
unhelpful
text
frustrating
difficulty
defining
key
term
look
instead
objectives
erisa
statute
guide
scope
state
law
congress
understood
survive
endorsed
approach
earlier
term
concluding
california
prevailing
wage
law
pre
empted
erisa
california
div
labor
standards
enforcement
dillingham
slip
following
approach
begin
noting
historic
police
powers
state
include
regulation
matters
health
safety
hillsborough
county
automated
medical
laboratories
hfa
revenue
raising
measure
rather
regulation
hospitals
clearly
operates
field
traditionally
occupied
ibid
quoting
jones
rath
packing
respondentstherefore
bear
considerable
burden
overcoming
starting
presumption
congress
intend
supplant
state
law
travelers
nothing
operation
hfa
convinces
us
type
state
law
congress
intended
erisa
supercede
case
new
york
forbidden
method
calculating
pension
benefits
federal
law
permits
required
employers
provide
certain
benefits
case
existence
pension
plan
critical
element
state
law
cause
action
onein
state
statute
contains
provisions
expressly
refer
erisa
erisa
plans
consideration
actual
operation
state
statute
leads
us
conclusion
hfa
one
myriad
state
laws
general
applicability
impose
burdens
administration
erisa
plans
nevertheless
relate
within
meaning
governing
statute
see
travelers
dillingham
slip
hfa
tax
hospitals
hospitals
owned
operated
erisa
funds
particular
erisa
fund
arranged
provide
medical
benefits
plan
beneficiaries
running
hospitals
directly
rather
purchasing
services
independently
run
hospitals
fund
made
choice
purchased
health
care
services
hospital
facility
passed
expense
hfa
onto
fund
plan
beneficiaries
rates
set
services
provided
fund
decide
whether
cover
limited
range
services
beneficiaries
perhaps
charge
plan
members
higher
rates
although
tax
circumstance
indirect
impact
fund
decisions
relevant
respects
identical
direct
impact
felt
thus
supposed
difference
direct
indirect
impact
upon
appeals
relied
distinguishing
case
travelers
withstand
scrutiny
state
tax
law
increases
cost
providing
benefits
tocovered
employees
effect
administration
erisa
plans
simply
mean
every
state
law
effect
pre
empted
federal
statute
judgment
appeals
reversed
ordered
barbara
de
buono
new
york
commis
sioner
health
et
petitioners
medical
clinical
services
fund
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
scalia
justice
thomas
joins
duty
see
jurisdiction
circuit
defined
limited
statute
exceeded
louisville
nashville
mottley
despite
obligation
examine
federal
jurisdiction
even
issue
raised
either
party
despite
explicit
acknowledgement
ante
possibility
jurisdiction
case
barred
tax
injunction
act
proceeds
decide
merits
respondents
erisa
pre
emption
challenge
offers
two
grounds
passing
threshold
question
jurisdiction
settled
practice
according
respect
courts
appeals
greater
familiarity
issues
state
law
petitioner
active
participation
nearly
four
years
federal
litigation
complaint
federal
jurisdiction
ante
view
neither
factors
justifies
proceeding
without
resolving
issue
jurisdiction
tax
injunction
act
bars
federal
jurisdiction
action
seeking
enjoin
state
tax
theone
issue
plain
speedy
efficient
remedy
may
courts
state
see
arkansas
farm
credit
servs
central
post
describing
act
jurisdictional
rule
broad
jurisdictional
barrier
district
case
suggested
tax
injunction
act
might
bar
jurisdiction
since
new
york
courts
might
afford
respondents
plain
remedy
within
meaning
act
see
medical
clinical
services
fund
axelrod
civ
sdny
app
pet
cert
suggestion
however
based
upon
district
resolution
issues
state
law
today
opinion
intimates
ante
rather
rested
upon
district
conclusion
uncertainty
implications
federal
statute
erisa
might
render
availability
state
remedy
plain
app
pet
cert
ofappeals
turn
made
mention
jurisdictional
issue
presumably
controlling
circuit
precedent
jurisdiction
secure
second
circuit
previously
held
state
courts
provide
remedy
erisa
based
challenges
state
taxes
within
meaning
tax
injunction
act
since
congress
divested
state
courts
jurisdiction
erisa
claims
travelers
ins
cuomo
citing
erisa
rev
grounds
sub
nom
new
york
state
conference
blue
cross
blue
shield
plans
travelers
ins
holding
like
district
discussion
issue
case
way
turns
new
york
state
law
loss
understand
invocation
settled
practice
according
respect
courts
appeals
greater
familiarity
issues
state
law
ante
basis
overlooking
question
whether
tax
injunction
act
bars
federal
jurisdiction
second
factor
relied
upon
support
treatment
jurisdictional
issue
petitioner
dropped
issue
district
failed
adopt
interpretation
tax
injunction
act
fact
petitioner
active
ly
participat
ed
nearly
four
years
federal
litigation
complaint
federal
jurisdiction
possibly
confer
upon
us
jurisdiction
otherwise
possess
duty
resolve
jurisdictional
question
whether
beenpreserved
parties
sumner
mata
louisville
nashville
sumner
confronted
identical
circumstance
presented
jurisdictional
argument
raised
district
abandoned
appeals
felt
need
address
jurisdictional
issue
previously
noted
split
among
circuits
question
whether
tax
injunction
act
deprives
federal
courts
jurisdiction
erisa
based
challenges
state
taxes
see
barnes
systems
group
hospital
medical
surgical
ins
plan
scalia
chambers
prior
case
expressly
left
question
open
saying
express
opinion
whether
party
sue
erisa
enjoin
declare
invalid
state
tax
levy
despite
tax
injunction
act
noted
answer
depend
whether
state
law
provide
speedy
efficient
remedy
whether
congress
intended
erisa
exception
tax
injunction
act
franchise
tax
bd
cal
construction
laborers
vacation
trust
southern
uncertain
federal
courts
jurisdiction
case
set
jurisdictional
issue
briefing
argument
resolve
issue
reaching
merits
respondents
erisa
pre
emption
claim
accordingly
respectfully
dissent
today
opinion
footnotes
boundaries
erisa
pre
emptive
reach
focus
considerable
attention
case
one
three
addressing
issue
term
see
boggs
boggs
california
div
labor
standards
enforcement
dillingham
constr
years
since
first
took
question
decided
fewer
cases
see
new
york
state
conference
blue
cross
blue
shield
plans
travelers
ins
john
hancock
mut
life
ins
harris
trust
sav
bank
district
columbia
greater
washington
bd
trade
mcclendon
fmc
holliday
massachusetts
morash
mackey
lanier
collection
agency
service
fort
halifax
packing
coyne
metropolitan
life
ins
taylor
pilot
life
ins
dedeaux
metropolitan
life
ins
massachusetts
shaw
delta
air
lines
alessi
issue
also
generated
avalanche
litigation
lower
courts
see
greater
washington
board
trade
stevens
dissenting
observing
lexis
search
uncovered
opinions
erisa
pre
emption
section
erisa
informs
us
xcept
provided
subsection
section
provisions
statute
shall
supersede
state
laws
insofar
may
hereafter
relate
employee
benefit
plan
covered
statute
stat
none
exceptions
subsection
directly
issue
case
pub
health
law
mckinney
addition
taxing
income
derived
patient
services
facilities
hfa
taxes
investment
income
certain
operating
income
pub
health
law
mckinney
taxation
activities
challenged
response
complaint
filed
petitioners
objected
federal
jurisdiction
relying
tax
injunction
act
provides
federal
courts
shall
enjoin
suspend
restrain
assessment
levy
collection
tax
state
law
plain
speedy
efficient
remedy
may
courts
state
respondents
contended
statute
apply
new
york
courts
provide
plain
remedy
required
bar
federal
jurisdiction
district
appears
agreed
respondents
see
app
pet
cert
ultimately
granted
summary
judgment
dismissed
complaint
squarely
decide
question
appeals
address
tax
injunction
act
either
two
opinions
case
nosuggestion
anywhere
papers
state
raised
issue
second
circuit
previously
held
however
tax
injunction
act
bar
actions
see
travelers
ins
cuomo
rev
grounds
new
york
state
conference
blue
cross
blue
shield
plans
travelers
ins
travelers
noted
examine
conclusion
see
case
bar
appeals
presumably
satisfied
jurisdiction
secure
reasons
given
travelers
party
either
travelers
current
case
mentioned
tax
injunction
act
questioned
appeals
conclusion
plain
remedy
unavailable
new
york
courts
given
settled
practice
according
respect
courts
appeals
greater
familiarity
issues
state
law
cf
bishop
wood
state
active
participation
nearly
four
years
federal
litigation
complaint
federal
jurisdiction
appropriate
us
presume
appeals
correctly
determined
circumstances
new
york
courts
provide
plain
remedy
barring
federal
consideration
state
tax
see
mackey
generally
applicable
garnishment
law
pre
empted
fort
halifax
packing
state
law
requiring
one
time
severance
payment
pre
empted
see
also
dillingham
slip
scalia
concurring
pplying
relate
provision
according
terms
project
doomed
failure
since
many
curbstone
philosopher
observed
everything
related
everything
else
federal
law
said
bar
state
action
fields
traditional
state
regulation
worked
assumption
historic
police
powers
superseded
federal
act
unless
clear
manifest
purpose
congress
travelers
quoting
rice
santa
fe
elevator
see
also
dillingham
slip
prevailing
wage
statute
alters
incentives
dictate
choices
facing
erisa
plans
regard
different
myriad
state
laws
areas
traditionally
subject
local
regulation
congress
possibly
intended
eliminate
travelers
hold
pre
empted
state
law
area
traditional
state
regulation
based
tenuous
relation
without
grave
violence
presumption
congress
intended
nothing
sort
thus
conclude
california
prevailing
wage
laws
apprenticeship
standards
connection
therefore
relate
erisa
plans
dillingham
slip
indeed
appeals
rested
conclusion
small
part
fact
hfa
targets
health
care
industry
nysa
ila
medical
clinical
services
fund
axelrod
rather
warranting
pre
emption
point
supports
application
starting
presumption
pre
emption
respondents
place
great
weight
fact
congress
added
specific
provision
erisa
save
hawaii
prepaid
health
care
act
pre
emption
legislature
noted
erisa
generally
preempt
state
tax
law
relating
employee
benefit
plans
see
brief
respondents
significant
difference
language
provision
pre
emption
provision
unconvinced
stricter
standard
pre
emption
apply
state
tax
provisions
state
laws
see
alessi
raybestos
manhattan
whatever
purpose
purposes
new
jersey
statute
conclude
relate
pension
plans
governed
erisa
eliminates
one
method
calculating
pension
benefits
integration
permitted
federal
law
see
shaw
delta
air
lines
erisa
pre
empted
state
law
requiring
provision
pregnancy
benefits
metropolitan
life
ins
massachusetts
law
required
benefit
plans
include
minimum
mental
health
benefits
related
erisa
plans
see
ingersoll
rand
dealing
generally
applicable
statute
makes
reference
indeed
functions
irrespective
existence
erisa
plan
existence
pension
plan
critical
factor
establishing
liability
state
wrongful
discharge
law
result
cause
action
relates
merely
pension
benefits
essence
pension
plan
see
mackey
provision
explicitly
refers
erisa
defining
scope
state
law
application
pre
empted
greater
washington
board
trade
section
district
equity
amendment
act
specifically
refers
welfare
benefit
plans
regulated
erisa
basis
alone
pre
empted
ackowledged
travelers
might
state
law
whose
economic
effects
intentionally
otherwise
acute
force
erisa
plan
adopt
certain
scheme
substantive
coverage
effectively
restrict
choice
insurers
state
law
might
indeed
pre
empted
case
district
rested
conclusion
demonstrated
sole
authorities
cited
support
conclusion
travelers
ins
cuomo
supp
sdny
aff
part
rev
part
rev
grounds
sub
nom
new
york
state
conference
blue
cross
blue
shield
plans
travelers
ins
national
carriers
conference
committee
heffernan
supp
argument
travelers
supports
conclusion
reached
argument
ecause
erisa
generally
confers
exclusive
jurisdiction
federal
courts
new
york
state
might
well
feel
compelled
dismiss
state
action
grounds
jurisdiction
preempted
thus
minimum
availability
state
remedy
plain
internal
quotation
marks
brackets
omitted
likewise
heffernan
arose
connecticut
new
york
offers
pertinent
reasoning
based
federal
law
jurisdiction
suits
arising
erisa
minor
exceptions
vested
exclusively
federal
courts
suit
brought
state
might
well
feel
compelled
dismiss
action
grounds
jurisdiction
preempted
federal
legislation
supremacy
clause
consequently
plaintiff
said
plain
speedy
efficient
remedy
state
omitted