Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Insurance

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Insurance

Courts rule on when insurance plans are covered by ERISA - and when they're not

Article Abstract:

Two recent court rulings have stipulated the circumstances when a welfare benefit plan falls under the ERISA (Employee Retirement Income Security Act). Group health insurance was held not subject to ERISA while group insurance plan was held subject to it. Furthermore, if an employer merely purchased insurance, collected premiums and submitted claims, it has not made an ERISA plan. Employers should not act in a way that endorses the program so as to avoid fiduciary liability.

Author: Mamorsky, Jeffrey D.
Publisher: Warren, Gorham & Lamont, Inc.
Publication Name: Journal of Compensation and Benefits
Subject: Insurance
ISSN: 0893-780X
Year: 1992
Occupational health services

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Letter agreement promising benefits covered under ERISA

Article Abstract:

Agreements contracted at the time of an employee's retirement which provide for retirement income inclusive of other plan benefits constitute an ERISA pension plan. The law mandates that the presence of intended benefits, a class of beneficiaries, financing and administrative procedures place an agreement under its coverage. Thus, retirement contracts stipulating additional benefits for a single individual still fall under ERISA regulations.

Author: Mamorsky, Jeffrey D.
Publisher: Warren, Gorham & Lamont, Inc.
Publication Name: Journal of Compensation and Benefits
Subject: Insurance
ISSN: 0893-780X
Year: 1992
Retirement income, Retirement benefits

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Employer cannot cancel spouse's COBRA coverage

Article Abstract:

The Supreme Court has rejected the 'significant gap' approach to defending cancellation of Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA) coverage. The ruling should prompt employers to carefully review employee coverage plans as the Supreme Court cites the approach as plagued with difficulties and cannot be used to defend cancellation of employee coverage.

Author: Mamorsky, Jeffrey D.
Publisher: Warren, Gorham & Lamont, Inc.
Publication Name: Journal of Compensation and Benefits
Subject: Insurance
ISSN: 0893-780X
Year: 1998
Regulation, Licensing, and Inspection of Miscellaneous Commercial Sectors, Insurance Regulation, Employee benefits, Insurance law

User Contributions:

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

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Laws, regulations and rules, Group insurance
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: "ERISA common law" rescinds insurance coverage obtained fraudulently. ERISA. Court dismisses breach of ERISA fiduciary duty and Rico claims against United Healthcare
  • Abstracts: Supreme Court to review decision on right to sue HMOs under ERISA. Supreme Court rejects right to sue HMOs under ERISA but plan sponsors should not rest easy
  • Abstracts: Costs count: a Best's Policy Reports survey examines the costs incurred with the life insurance portion of variable universal life policies
  • Abstracts: Lull in annuities sales may soon end. Five-year universal life policy history. Five-year history of flexible-premium annuities
  • Abstracts: Auto insurance - 1991. Lasting storm damage. The top 250
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.