A Closer Look At “Preemptive” Federal Contract Terms

Subrogation of insureds’ third-party claims is not a subject that excites too many lawyers. But in Coventry Health Care of Missouri Inc. v. Nevils, No. 16-149, decided on April 18, 2017, the Supreme Court issued a subrogation-related opinion that will be of interest to anyone who tracks the Court’s federal preemption jurisprudence.  In particular, the Court held that a federal statute’s preemption provision passes constitutional muster even if it defines the scope of preemption of state law indirectly by referring to the terms of a federal contract.

To read more of Larry Ebner’s Coventry Health Care  analysis, which appeared in April 20, 2017 editions of Law360, click here

Scroll to Top