Search the News Archive

Text of Amicus Brief of Insurance and Employer Organizations in Petition for Certiorari on Availability of Equitable Relief to ERISA Disability Plan (PDF)

34 pages. "Question presented: Whether the [9th Circuit] court of appeals erred in holding that when an ERISA plan seeks to recover overpaid benefits from a plan participant, 'equitable relief' is available and 'appropriate' under ERISA's remedial provision, 29 U.S.C. section 1132(a)(3), only if the participant still possesses the specific funds in question, or their specifically identifiable proceeds." [First Unum Life Insurance Co. v. Bilyeu, et al., (Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 12-526)]

Text of Amicus Brief Urging Supreme Court to Consider Broader Effect on Welfare Benefit Plans of Vermont Healthcare Database Reporting Mandate (PDF)

39 pages. "The more States are empowered to impose burdensome regulatory requirements on employers, the more they will do so. This slippery slope presents a serious threat to the viability of welfare benefit plans, and thus to the purposes of ERISA. State programs such as Vermont's all-payer claims database undercut ERISA's objectives by subjecting self-funded plans to a morass of state reporting requirements that Congress neither intended nor allowed in enacting ERISA."

Text of Amicus Brief by Employer Organizations in Support of Employer on Appeal to Sixth Circuit of Rochow v. LINA (PDF)

24 pages. "The decision, if affirmed, would significantly increase the risk, cost, and uncertainty associated with offering ERISA-governed employee benefits, including a dramatic increase in the expense and burden of resolving benefits cases. These effects will have negative repercussions for the availability and affordability of valuable employee benefits on which millions of American workers and their families depend.... [T]he district court fashioned a purportedly 'appropriate equitable' remedy under Section 502(a)(3) that is contrary to the carefully balanced scheme and purposes of ERISA, and inappropriately punitive in nature. As such, the decision should be reversed."

Text of Amicus Brief Urging Supreme Court Review of Ninth Circuit Decision Allowing Participant to Seek Recovery of Benefits from Claims Administrator (PDF)

26 pages. "The question in this case is not whether an ERISA plan beneficiary may bring suit under 29 U.S.C. Section 1132(a)(1)(B) to recover benefits due to him. Rather, the question is who he may sue.... The Ninth Circuit's reasoning appears to rest on a misconception that amici and their members are uniquely positioned to dispel. The panel seemed to believe that there is no difference between an ERISA plan administrator and a mere claims administrator.... As amici's members know well from serving as plan sponsors, insurers, and claims administrators, those roles are different indeed. In fact, the record in this very case highlights the stark contrasts between plan administrators and claims administrators. Unfortunately, however, the panel failed to appreciate that crucial distinction." [Spinedex Physical Therapy USA Inc. v. United Healthcare of Arizona, Inc., No. 12-17604 (9th Cir. Nov. 5, 2014; cert. pet. filed Apr. 24, 2015)]