Health claim denial-standard of review-arbitrary and capricious-medically necessary
Article Abstract:
A decision made in good faith to turn down insurance coverage for treating conditions or complications indirectly or directly pertaining to or precipitated by gastric stapling or weight-loss diversion procedures was affirmed. The affirmation occurred even though the services were needed medically to ameliorate life threatening complications.
Publication Name: Benefits Quarterly
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 8756-1263
Year: 2001
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Focus on plan administration: Administration- health benefits- reimbursement
Article Abstract:
In Reynolds Metals vs Ellis, the suit involved the company's rights to recover costs of health care claims if the injured person received a payment from a liable third party. Ellis sustained serious injuries in a car accident, and received benefits amounting to a large sum. He later sued the third party responsible for the accident and received an even larger settlement. He refused to reimburse the Reynolds Metals plan, despite its plan language reserving the right for it to do so; the courts rejected its claim on the grounds that it did not demonstrate that it was seeking equitable, rather than legal, relief.
Publication Name: Benefits Quarterly
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 8756-1263
Year: 2001
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Cobra - notice; breach of fiduciary duty
Article Abstract:
Rogers Galvanizing breached its fiduciary duty after it did not meet some Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) requirements in the Smith v Rogers Galvanizing case, 1997, of the Tenth Circuit. The case stemmed from Clarence Smith's complaint against his employer, Rogers, which stopped paying the premium on his health insurance. Rogers also told them that their COBRA rights had expired after Smith and his wife failed to elect continuation of coverage within 60 days after Clarence was terminated from work for health reasons. The Tenth Circuit ruled that the oral notice served to the Smiths did not satisfy COBRA requirements as it failed to advise them that they had 45 days left after election to pay the monthly premium.
Publication Name: Benefits Quarterly
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 8756-1263
Year: 1999
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Maternity, paternity and parental benefits across Europe - part one. Progress in sectoral bargaining
- Abstracts: Rewarding and retaining the best: compensation strategies for top performers. Rewarding employees with psychic income pays long-term dividends
- Abstracts: Privatizing government pensions: The United States and the Netherlands. Are Cash Balance Plans Defined Benefit or Defined Contribution Plans?