A recent federal court ruling in Michigan outlined the scope of a provision in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act that exempts “church plans” from being subject to Employee Retirement Income Security Act funding and reporting requirements. In Overall v. Ascension, 2014 WL 1908428, 2014 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 65418 (E.D.Mich. May 13, 2014), the plaintiff brought a […]
Both the Internal Revenue Code and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act have rules that prevent assignments of retirement benefits in order to ensure that retirees actually receive the benefits that they were promised. ERISA flatly states that “each pension plan” must provide that benefits under the plan cannot be “assigned or alienated.” There are […]
In Criss v. Union Security Ins.Co., 2014 WL 2707774, 2014 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 79300 (N.D.Ala. June 11, 2014), Judge William Acker, Jr. challenged the current methodology utilized by courts in adjudicating benefit disputes brought under ERISA. The court based its premise on the universally recognized legal maxim, nemo judex in causa sua; i.e., “No man should be […]
DeBofsky & Associates recently partnered with United Policyholders on an amicus brief in the high-profile ERISA case of Rochow v. Life Insurance Company of North America.
In Gordon v. Deloitte & Touche LLP Group Long Term Disability Plan, 2014 U.S.App.LEXIS 6688 (9th Cir. April 11, 2014), the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was called upon to decide the question of whether an expired limitations period may be revived by insurer’s conduct after the time for bringing suit had ended.
Statutes of limitation can be very confusing in Employee Retirement Income Security Act cases. Since the provision of ERISA that authorizes claimants to sue to recover benefits (29 U.S.C. Section 1132(a)(1)(B)) lacks its own statute of limitations, courts borrow the most analogous limitations period under state law. But if the benefit plan contains its own […]