Summary plan descriptions; COBRA

Article Abstract:

Scott Fallo filed a case against former employer Piccadilly Cafeterias for benefits and damages under Employee Retirement Income Security Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The suit stemmed from Piccadilly's refusal to extend health insurance coverage for Fallo and his wife for 11 months more. Although the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) allows a qualified beneficiary to extend health coverage after losing coverage due to a qualifying event, the Fallos failed to provide Piccadilly with a Social Security finding within the first 18 months of continuation coverage. However, the Fifth Circuit did rule that the couple was entitled to the additional COBRA coverage based on the summary plan description.

Eating places, Restaurants & Food Service, Food Services and Drinking Places, Direct Health and Medical Insurance Carriers, Employee Benefits & Services, Hospital and medical service plans, Medical Care Insurance, Restaurant industry, Human resource management, Employee benefits, Piccadilly Cafeterias Inc., PIC

---

In re AppleTree Markets, 17 EBC 2681 (5th Cir. 1994)

Article Abstract:

The South Central United Food and Commercial Workers Unions and Employment Health and Welfare Trust (UFCW Health Trust) sued AppleTree Markets Inc. for refusing to include former employees receiving benefits from the UFCW Health Trust under COBRA in its new group health plan. UFCW Health Trust argued that AppleTree was the plan sponsor and referred to ERISA Section 602(1) for further support. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit rejected UFCW Health Trust's arguments, explaining that the plan is mandated to provide continued coverage under COBRA to employees of an employer withdrawing from a multiemployer plan.

Supermarkets and Other Grocery (except Convenience) Stores, Grocery stores, Accident & Health Insurance, Insurance Carriers, Supermarket Chains, Medical Service and Health Insurance, Grocery industry, AppleTree Markets Inc.

---

COBRA

Article Abstract:

The District Court of Massachusetts held that premature discontinuation of health coverage violates the ERISA as well as the botice requirements of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985. Under this precept the court decided to award summary judgment to the plaintiff David Gaskell of the Gaskell versus Harvard Cooperative Society case. Although the court awarded the plaintiff compensatory damages, it refused to award punitive damages.

Book stores, Stationery stores, Accident and health insurance, Gaskell, David, United States. District Court. Massachusetts, Harvard Cooperative Society

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Oberg v. Allied Van Lines Inc., 17 EBC 2083 (7th Cir. 1994). Wamsley v. Champlin Refining and Chemicals Inc., 11 F. 3d 534 (5th Cir. 1993)
• Abstracts: Military reservists' rights to civilian reemployment. Morganbesser v. U.S., 14 EBC 2601 (D.Conn. 1992)
• Abstracts: Deferring taxation on restricted stock awards, nonqualified stock options and cash awards. Separation anxiety: will you lose touch with employees by outsourcing?

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.