Stuart v. UNUM Life Insur. Co., 217 F.3d 1145 (9^th Cir. 2000)-This Court addressed whether a group insurance plan offered by an employer satisfied the "safe harbor" criteria which would render it an employee welfare benefit plan subject to ERISA—a critical question when ERISA preemption is at issue. The court concluded that the scheme must meet all four requirements of the safe harbor regulation for it to take effect.

The elements are: "(1) No contributions are made by an employer or employee organization (2) Participation in the program is completely voluntary . . . (3) The sole functions of the employer . . . are, without endorsing the program, to permit the insurer to publicize the program to employees or members, to collect premiums through payroll deductions or dues checkoffs and to remit them to the insurer; and (4) The employer or employee organization receives no consideration . . . other than reasonable compensation, excluding any profit, for administrative services . . . . " See 29 C.F.R. § 2510.3-1(j).

In this case, the Court concluded that Desert Hospital, the employer of plaintiffs had indeed "contributed" to the disability plan, and therefore Defendant properly removed the dispute to district court.  Thus, because removal to the district court was proper, the district court based its remand order on an erroneous view and application of the law and the district court necessarily abused its discretion when it awarded Stuart costs and actual expenses pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(c).