Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Human resources and labor relations

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Human resources and labor relations

Wilson v. Group Hospitalization and Medical Services, Inc., 15 EBC 1446, 1992 WL 96206 (Westlaw)(D.D.C. 1992)

Article Abstract:

The District Court of Columbia ordered Blue Cross Assn to provide coverage for Deborah Wilson's chemotherapy treatment since they failed to provide timely and effective notice of their health plan amendment. Blue Cross Assn refused to grant certification payment to Wilson based on a Nov 30, 1991 amendment to the health plan regarding organ transplants. The district court, however, Blue Cross Assn did not give Wilson's employer sufficient notice to the plan amendment. Moreover, the court ordered the isurance carrier to continue coverage of Wilson's medical and recovery costs.

Publisher: International Society of Certified Employee Benefit Specialists
Publication Name: Benefits Quarterly
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 8756-1263
Year: 1993
Accident and health insurance, Laws, regulations and rules, Health insurance, Blue Cross Association, United States. District Court. District of Columbia, Wilson, Deborah

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Offsetting liability for breach of fiduciary duty

Article Abstract:

The District Court of New Jersey held that under the antialienation provisions of the ERISA pension benefits cannot be used as a compensation for a fudiciary's criminal misuse of fund assets. The court ruled in the Coar versus Kazimir case that in the absence of specific instructions from Congress, ERISA's antialienation provision must be fully applied even if it meant honoring the pension benefits of an employee convicted for breach of fiduciary duty.

Publisher: International Society of Certified Employee Benefit Specialists
Publication Name: Benefits Quarterly
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 8756-1263
Year: 1992
Pension, health, and welfare funds, Usage, Pension funds, Coar, Robert, United States. District Court. New Jersey

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Fiduciaries-HMOs-incentives to ration care

Article Abstract:

The Supreme Court ruled in Pegram v. Herdrich that a health maintenance organization is not liable for breach of fiduciary duty as a result of its doctors' mixed eligibility decisions. The case is further detailed.

Publisher: International Society of Certified Employee Benefit Specialists
Publication Name: Benefits Quarterly
Subject: Human resources and labor relations
ISSN: 8756-1263
Year: 2001
Medical care, Herdrich, Cynthia, Pegram, Lori, Carle Clinic Association

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Cases, Health maintenance organizations, Fiduciary duties
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: Mixed progress on diversity in civil service. Ethnic minority police up - but progress slow. Diversity progress in the Civil Service
  • Abstracts: Line between physical and mental impairment. Implementing a disability strategy
  • Abstracts: Medicare in the 21st century. Benefit cost management in the new Millennium. Health benefit vouchers: all talk and no action?
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.