The U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to grant certiorari to review the Fourth Circuit’s decision in RJR Pension Investment, et al. v. Tatum, 761 F.3d 363 (4th Cir. 2014). As we previously reported here, a divided panel of the Fourth Circuit held that, because the plaintiff proved that the plan fiduciaries acted imprudently
GM Not Obligated to Make $450 Million Contribution to Fund Union Retiree Health Benefits
The Sixth Circuit held that GM was not obligated to contribute $450 million to fund retiree health benefits for UAW members because the most recent contract between the UAW and GM extinguished GM’s former obligation to contribute. In response to earlier litigation between the UAW against GM to recover retiree health benefits and a bankruptcy
First Circuit Reviews Top Hat Plan Benefits Denial for Abuse of Discretion
The First Circuit recently applied an abuse of discretion standard of review to a claim for top hat plan benefits. Plaintiff Robert Niebauer, a former executive of Crane, brought a claim for executive severance plan benefits and a claim under ERISA section 510 for interference with his rights to benefits. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Crane on both claims, finding that the denial was not arbitrary or capricious, and there was no adverse employment action to support his interference claim.
US Supreme Court to Consider ERISA’s Tracing Requirements
On March 30, the U.S. Supreme Court announced it would review Bd. of Trustees of Nat. Elevator Indus. Health Ben. Plan v. Montanile, 593 F. App’x 903 (11th Cir. 2014). As discussed here, at issue in the case is whether an ERISA fiduciary of a health benefit plan, who alleges that a beneficiary
Fifth Circuit: Hospital Enjoys Standing to Seek ERISA Benefits
The Fifth Circuit ruled that an out-of-network medical provider that was assigned a patient’s rights to health insurance benefits has standing to sue a health plan that underpays its portion of the benefits due even if the plan participant portion is paid in full. North Cypress Medical Ctr. Operating Co., et al. v. Cigna Healthcare, et al., No. 12-20695 (5th Cir. Mar. 10, 2015).
Same-Sex Spouse Has No Standing to Assert COBRA Notice Claim
A New Jersey federal district court held (in an unpublished opinion) that a former plan participant’s same-sex spouse who never enrolled in the benefit plan did not have standing to assert a claim alleging that his spouse’s employer failed to provide proper and timely notice of coverage under COBRA.
Eleventh Circuit Enforces Subrogation Clause
The Eleventh Circuit recently concluded that Robert Montanile, a welfare plan participant, could not avoid reimbursing the National Elevator Industry Health Benefit Plan for benefits it paid on his behalf after he recovered from a third party tortfeasor. In so ruling, the Court rejected Montanile’s arguments that the plan’s reimbursement provision was not enforceable because
Tenth Circuit Finds Plan Administrator Has No Duty to Inquire into Authenticity of Participant’s Beneficiary Designation
Plaintiff Kristopher Towles, the son of a deceased participant of a life insurance plan, challenged the plan’s decision to pay the life insurance proceeds to the deceased’s husband, contending that the beneficiary form replacing him with the deceased husband had been forged. After five attempts to state a claim, the district court dismissed the complaint
Eighth Circuit Says That Considerations Of Health Care Cost Savings Could Be Proxy For Age In ADEA Suits
The Eighth Circuit recently concluded that an employer may violate the ADEA by terminating an older employee in order to reduce its health care premiums. Tramp v. Associated Underwriters, Inc., 2014 WL 4977396 (8th Cir. 2014). Plaintiff Marjorie Tramp brought claims of discrimination and retaliation under the ADEA, arguing that Defendant Associated Underwriters, Inc. terminated her to reduce its health care costs and in retaliation for her refusal to rely on Medicare benefits in lieu of employer-sponsored benefits.