Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Human resources and labor relations

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Human resources and labor relations

Prescription drug copayments - fiduciary duty - plan discounts

Article Abstract:

The decision given by the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts in Alves v. Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc., 316 F.3d 290 (1st Cir. 2003) affirm'd per curiam, 204 F. Supp. 2d 198 (D.C. Mass. 2002) is presented. The case is about the interpretation of the extent of c opayments for prescription drugs in health care plans. James Alves and Hillel Stavis filed the case against Harvard Pilgrim Health Care, Inc. The relevant provisions of ERISA are also d iscussed.

Publisher: International Society of Certified Employee Benefit Specialists
Publication Name: Benefits Quarterly
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 8756-1263
Year: 2005
Drugs Reimbursement Benefits, Prescription drug plans, Fiduciary duties, United States. District Court (Massachusetts)

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Exhaustion of remedies - plan's failure to inform

Article Abstract:

Non-compliance with undisclosed claims filing requirements cannot be the basis for applying the doctrine of exhaustion of administration remedies. Hubert Back filed the case against Danka Corporation for wrongfully withholding severance pay in violation of ERISA. This was the ruling given by the Eighth Circuit Court of appeals in the Back v. Danka Corp., case.

Publisher: International Society of Certified Employee Benefit Specialists
Publication Name: Benefits Quarterly
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 8756-1263
Year: 2004
Office machines, not elsewhere classified, Office equipment and supplies industry, Office equipment industry, Retirement income, Workers, United States. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit, Back, Hubert, Danka Office Imaging Company Inc.

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Supreme court review: social security disability insurance benefits - eligibility

Article Abstract:

In the Barnhart, Commissioner of Social Security v. Walton, the Supreme Court has upheld the SSA's interpretation of the act in awarding disability benefits to the applicant and the subsequent modification.

Publisher: International Society of Certified Employee Benefit Specialists
Publication Name: Benefits Quarterly
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 8756-1263
Year: 2004
Administration of Human Resource Programs (except Education, Public Health, and Veterans' Affairs Programs), Social Security Administration, Interpretation and construction, Disability rights, United States. Supreme Court, United States. Social Security Administration

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States, Company legal issue, Cases, Standards
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Control costs of retiree prescription drug benefits. Employee attitudes benefit plan designs
  • Abstracts: Protection products and services. Watching the detectors
  • Abstracts: Trade unions, management and European works councils: Opening Pandora's box? A comparison of the effectiveness of unions and non - union works councils in Korea: can non - union employee representation substitute for trade unionism?
  • Abstracts: A reassessment of the relationship between job specialization, job rotation and job burnout: example of Taiwan's high - technology industry
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.