Hartford Life & Accident Insurance v. Fugarino

How later courts describe this case

• finding that the sole proprietor of a restaurant was an “employer” rather than an “employee” under ERISA
• finding that the sole proprietor of a restaurant was an “employer” under ERISA and thus his insurance policy was not an ERISA plan
• stating that “for the purposes of the first paragraph of 1446(b
• state court findings made in action removed to federal court cannot form the basis for Rule 11 sanctions
• numerous courts have rejected claims of falsity when based on a misuse of formal legal terminology by nonlawyers
• “[I]f the case stated by the initial pleading is removable, then notice of removal must be filed within thirty days from the receipt of the initial pleading by the defendant.”
• "ERISA does not require a formal, written plan”