Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

NORTHEAST DEPT. ILGWU HEALTH & WELFARE FUND v. TEA

December 30, 1983

NORTHEAST DEPARTMENT ILGWU HEALTH AND WELFARE FUND and Sol Hoffman, Plaintiffs,
v.
TEAMSTERS LOCAL UNION NO. 229 WELFARE FUND, Defendant



The opinion of the court was delivered by: NEALON

 NEALON, Chief Judge.

 This case is before the court based upon cross-motions for summary judgment. All of the material facts appear in the Stipulation, Document 7 of the Record, including, as Exhibit "A", plaintiffs' group insurance plan and, as Exhibit "B", defendant's group insurance plan. After careful consideration, the court will grant plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and deny defendant's motion for the same.

 I.

 The plaintiff, ILGWU Fund, is an employee benefit plan within the meaning of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1002(1) and (3) and plaintiff Sol Hoffman is a fiduciary of the ILGWU Fund in accordance with 29 U.S.C. § 1002(21). Stipulation, Document No. 7 of the Record at 2. The defendant, Teamsters Fund, is also an employee benefit plan within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. §§ 1002(1) and (3). Id. The eligibility rules for the ILGWU Fund and the Teamsters Fund are promulgated by the trustees of their respective Funds through authority granted by the terms of their collective bargaining agreements. Id. at 2-3. The eligibility rules of the ILGWU Fund under review here state:

 
You are not eligible for hospital, medical-surgical, or Major Medical benefits under this plan if there exists at your spouse's place of employment a group plan which provides for family coverage of these types of benefits so long as 50% or more of the cost of such family coverage is paid by other than you or a member of your family.

 Id. at 3, citing Summary Plan Description of the ILGWU Fund at 7. The applicable eligibility rules of the Teamsters Fund provide:

 
Our Group Insurance Plan contains a non-profit provision coordinating it with other plans under which an individual is covered so that the total benefits available will not exceed 100% of the allowable expenses. . . .
 
When a claim is made, the primary plan pays its benefits without regard to any other plans. The secondary plans adjust their benefits so that the total benefits available will not exceed the allowable expenses. No plan pays more than it would without the coordination provision.
 
A plan without a coordinating provision is always the primary plan. If all plans have such a provision: (1) the plan covering the patient directly, rather than as an employee's dependent, is primary and the others secondary, (2) if a child is covered under both parents' plans, the father's is primary, (3) if neither (1) nor (2) applies, the plan covering the patient longest is primary.

 Id. at 4-5, citing Summary Plan Description of the Teamsters Fund at 35.

 This case is before the court as a result of both the ILGWU Fund and the Teamsters Fund denying coverage for medical bills submitted to them for services incurred by Ruth Fazio. Mrs. Fazio, an employee in the garment industry, is a participant in the ILGWU Fund and a beneficiary of the Teamsters Fund (inasmuch as her husband is employed in an industry covered by the Teamsters Fund). Id. at 5. After receipt of the bills, the ILGWU Fund advised Mrs. Fazio that she was not eligible for hospital, medical-surgical or Major Medical benefits since she was covered by the Teamsters Fund as a dependent. *fn1" The Teamsters Fund determined they would not pay the bills since their plan coordinates against other plans under which an individual is covered. *fn2"

 The issues for this court to address are:

 
(1) Whether the ILGWU Fund or the Teamsters Fund is responsible for Ruth ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.