In a recent decision, Eden Surgical Center v. Cognizant Technology Solutions Corporation et al., No. 2:15-cv-01633-RGK-E (Apr. 26, 2016), the US Court
Mull v. Motion Picture Ind. Health Plan educates employers on the basics of the requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
We’ve previously written several posts (not recently) on Medicare secondary payer (“MSP”) issues - which we characterized as “boring.” The recent MSP
Not everyone sees eye to eye on federal preemption, including judges. Take for example the conflicting opinions from the California Court of Appeal
In its recent decision in Edwards v. A.H. Cornell and Son, Inc., No. 09-3198 (June 24, 2010), the U.S Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit weighed in on an issue that has split the federal Courts of Appeals: whether ERISA’s retaliation provision, 510, protects purely internal complaints by employees.
With employers and employees alike burdened by skyrocketing health care costs, and more than fifty million Americans lacking health care coverage, it is becoming more and more likely that some sort of change to the current health care system is imminent.
April may turn out to be the "cruelest" month for employee benefit professionals.
On Tuesday, September 30, 2008, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals handed down its decision in Golden Gate Restaurant Association v. City of San Francisco, 2008 WL 4401387 (9th Cir. 2008).
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on September 29, 2008 issued an opinion of importance to ERISA health plans, employers, and beneficiaries.
Three recent developments may impact employer health plans.