On June 6, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court in Gallardo By & Through Vassallo v. Marstiller, No. 20-1263, 2022 WL 1914096 (U.S. June 6, 2022), held that the Medicaid Act allows states to seek reimbursement from settlement...more
The first two parts of this series on mass tort tips discussed the best practices for intake and how to develop an inventory of mass tort cases. Now that all that hard work has paid off, and it’s time for settlement. In any...more
Currently pending before the Tennessee Supreme Court is a case that could change the face of personal-injury litigation in the state. Accepted for review on October 24, 2016, Dedmon v. Steelman asks whether the amount billed...more
On January 20, 2016, the United States Supreme Court held that an ERISA plan could not satisfy its reimbursement rights from a participant’s general assets. ERISA plans’ reimbursement rights are now so limited that...more
Editor’s Overview - This month we review the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Montanile v. Board of Trustees of National Elevator Industries Health Benefit Plan where the Supreme Court considered the scope of...more
In Montanile v. Board of Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Health Benefit Plan, the US Supreme Court held that when an ERISA plan participant completely dissipates a settlement from a third party on items that are...more
Most self-funded ERISA medical plans provide that participants who have been injured by other people (think car accidents) must reimburse the plan if the participant recovers from the other person for those injuries. In order...more
On January 20, the Supreme Court released its decision in Montanile v. Board of Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Health Benefit Plan, concluding that although health plan fiduciaries can generally seek subrogation...more
Montanile v. Board of Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Health Benefit Plan is the fourth decision by the U.S. Supreme Court addressing the subrogation rights of self-insured ERISA-covered health plans. Three...more
Group health plan administrators should take actions to address the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that an ERISA plan cannot enforce its equitable lien, which had been established through the plan’s reimbursement...more
A new U.S. Supreme Court decision is a reminder that Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) plans must act promptly if they want to assert a lien to secure a participant’s obligation to reimburse medical expenses or...more
The Supreme Court of the United States recently handed down a decision that opens the door for participants in ERISA-covered benefits plans to stop a lawsuit against them in its tracks by doing something that most people love...more
It’s like a simple set of facts on a law school exam with an answer that defies logic. And, yet, Supreme Court precedent has brought us to this illogical conclusion. Facts: Participant agrees to reimburse the plan money it...more
It’s a common scenario when dealing with a benefit plan governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA): an employee participating in the plan is injured by a third-party, the plan pays covered medical...more
ERISA Section 502(a)(3) empowers plan fiduciaries to file suit “to obtain … appropriate equitable relief … to enforce … the terms of the plan.” In 1993, the Supreme Court of the United States interpreted this ERISA provision...more
Last week, the United States Supreme Court held that an ERISA healthcare benefit plan with reimbursement rights can only obtain “appropriate equitable relief” when enforcing its lien against a third-party settlement, thus...more
Over the years, the U.S. Supreme Court from time to time has explored the scope of equitable relief available under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) in circumstances where an employee benefit plan...more
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that an ERISA plan has no right to recover benefits paid on behalf of a participant where the participant has already dissipated settlement funds received from a third party. In...more
“A” gets hit by a drunk driver and incurs $121,044 in medical expenses. The ERISA Plan agrees to pay the expenses if “A” contractually agrees to reimburse the Plan for any recovery obtained as the result of any legal action...more
On January 20, 2016, the Supreme Court handed down yet another case addressing health plan subrogation. From the Supreme Court’s earlier decision in Sereboff v. Mid Atlantic Medical Services, Inc. (547 U.S. 356) (2006),...more
In Montanile v. Bd. of Trs. of the Nat'l Elevator Indus. Health Benefit Plan, the U.S. Supreme Court on January 19 held that when an ERISA plan participant wholly dissipates a third-party settlement on nontraceable items, a...more
On January 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Montanile v. Board of Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Health Benefit Plan, No. 14-723, holding that where an ERISA-plan participant has dissipated a third-party...more
In Uspenskaya v. Meline (filed October 28, 2015), the California Court of Appeal for the Third District held that evidence of payments made by a medical lien holder offered to prove the reasonable value of medical services...more