Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 13 of 13
Full-Text Articles in Law
For Whom The Bell (Equitably) Tolls: Erisa Compliance And Denial Of Benefits Notices Circuit Split, Sarah Smith
For Whom The Bell (Equitably) Tolls: Erisa Compliance And Denial Of Benefits Notices Circuit Split, Sarah Smith
Akron Law Review
The circuit courts are split as to how a plan administrator of an ERISA-governed employee benefit plan must notify a claimant of a time limitation placed on a claimant’s ability to seek judicial review of an adverse benefit decision. Some courts indicate that inclusion of this time limitation in the Summary Plan Description is sufficient to notify a claimant. Other courts have held that the time period must specifically be included in adverse determination notices, which are documents notifying claimants of the denial of their claim and the right to judicial review. Much of the debate among courts concerns the …
Employee Medical Reimbursement Plans In The Age Of Erisa, Robert D. Rosewater
Employee Medical Reimbursement Plans In The Age Of Erisa, Robert D. Rosewater
Akron Law Review
THE EMPLOYEE MEDICAL reimbursement plan presents a new dimension in the spectrum of available corporate fringe benefits. Its attractiveness lies in the relative ease by which the plan may be adopted and administered as well as the favorable federal income tax consequences to both the corporation and its participating employees. These plans undoubtedly will proliferate as other traditional fringe benefits become less attractive due to changes in tax laws,2 as medical expenses continue to increase, and as the advantages of employee medical reimbursement plans become more widely known. The scope of this article is to discuss the purposes of these …
Employee Medical Reimbursement Plans In The Age Of Erisa, Robert D. Rosewater
Employee Medical Reimbursement Plans In The Age Of Erisa, Robert D. Rosewater
Akron Law Review
THE EMPLOYEE MEDICAL reimbursement plan presents a new dimension in the spectrum of available corporate fringe benefits. Its attractiveness lies in the relative ease by which the plan may be adopted and administered as well as the favorable federal income tax consequences to both the corporation and its participating employees. These plans undoubtedly will proliferate as other traditional fringe benefits become less attractive due to changes in tax laws,2 as medical expenses continue to increase, and as the advantages of employee medical reimbursement plans become more widely known. The scope of this article is to discuss the purposes of these …
Anti-Fraud Provisions Of The Securities Act; Erisa; Pension Plans; Section 17(A) Private Right Of Action; Daniel V. International Brotherhood Of Teamsters, Marlene P. Emery, Barbara M. Heinzerling
Anti-Fraud Provisions Of The Securities Act; Erisa; Pension Plans; Section 17(A) Private Right Of Action; Daniel V. International Brotherhood Of Teamsters, Marlene P. Emery, Barbara M. Heinzerling
Akron Law Review
In Daniel v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the federal securities laws apply to disclosure of information regarding employee pension and profit sharing plans. In an era when disclosure of information has become mandatory and commonplace, it is not surprising that relevant information on pension plans should be disclosed to employees. The important aspect of this case is that disclosure was required under the anti-fraud provisions of the federal securities laws, rather than under the provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Questions concerning the Securities and Exchange Commission's jurisdiction over …
Securities Laws Implications For Savings Associations Acting As Trustees For Ira's And Keoghs
Securities Laws Implications For Savings Associations Acting As Trustees For Ira's And Keoghs
Akron Law Review
This article will focus on the major problem area which has resulted from the above legislation. That problem is whether or not a savings association must register with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) pursuant to the Securities Act of 1931 or the Investment Company Act of 1940, as a consequence of acting as trustee for an IRA or Keogh plan.
Disqualitifcation Of Employee Retirement Plans: The Wrong Remedy, William J. Rands
Disqualitifcation Of Employee Retirement Plans: The Wrong Remedy, William J. Rands
Akron Law Review
Yet Congress failed to extirpate from the tax laws the sanction of disqualifying an employee retirement plan. Not only has disqualification been described as being "draconian" and "harsh," but it has also been noted that it results in "tragedy," "penalizes the covered employees who have no part in the wrongdoing,"6 and frustrates the legislative purpose of encouraging the establishment and maintenance of employee retirement plans. The imposition of this sanction is nonsensical: the tax consequences devastate the financial security of employees whose future depends on the retirement income they will receive from their employers' plans. This article will discuss this …
Post-Norris Ambiguities: Unanswered Questions For Women And The Pension Industry, T. Timothy Ryan Jr., Paula A. Rock
Post-Norris Ambiguities: Unanswered Questions For Women And The Pension Industry, T. Timothy Ryan Jr., Paula A. Rock
Akron Law Review
On April 25, 1978, the United States Supreme Court decided Los Angeles Department of Water and Power v. Manhart in a way that was bound to have a profound effect on the pension industry. The division of opinion in the Manhart Court was indicative of the difficulty of the question presented. In Part I, this article examines the Court's findings in Manhart, as well as its conclusions in a more recent case, Arizona Governing Committee v. Norris, in which the Supreme Court extended its Manhart holding in a way bound to have an equally significant impact on pension …
Retiree Welfare Benefits: Erisa, Lmra And The Federal Common Law, Frances Figetakis
Retiree Welfare Benefits: Erisa, Lmra And The Federal Common Law, Frances Figetakis
Akron Law Review
Part I of this comment will examine the applicable statutory law in this area. Part II will examine the developing body of federal case law. Part III will address the underlying policy concerns in conjunction with already established precedent to provide insight into what the law in this area should be.
Are We Protected From Hmo Negligence?: An Examination Of Ohio Law, Erisa Preemption, And Legislative Initiatives, Amy K. Fehn
Are We Protected From Hmo Negligence?: An Examination Of Ohio Law, Erisa Preemption, And Legislative Initiatives, Amy K. Fehn
Akron Law Review
This comment discusses the various theories of HMO liability that are emerging in other jurisdictions as well as the extent to which current Ohio law bars several of these theories. In addition, this comment also discusses ERISA's preemption of state laws related to HMO liability. Finally, this comment analyzes legislative initiatives and other forms of regulation aimed at protecting consumers from HMO abuses .
Managed Care Organizations Manage To Escape Liability: Why Issues Of Quantity Vs. Quality Lead To Erisa's Inequitable Preemption Of Claims, Patricia Mullen Ochmann
Managed Care Organizations Manage To Escape Liability: Why Issues Of Quantity Vs. Quality Lead To Erisa's Inequitable Preemption Of Claims, Patricia Mullen Ochmann
Akron Law Review
In evaluating patients’ potential legal remedies, this Comment explores 1) the emergence of managed care organizations in the United States; 2) the creation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) and how it impacts patients’ claims against their MCOs; 3) the question of “quantity” versus “quality” in evaluating whether ERISA preemption exists; 4) three theories (direct liability, breach of fiduciary duty, and vicarious liability) used to hold MCOs liable for injuries resulting from malpractice or the wrongful denial of benefits; 5) state legislative attempts to circumvent ERISA’s inequitable preemption of claims; and 6) why, given ERISA’s failure …
Not Just Old Wine In New Bottles: Kentucky Ass'n Of Health Plans, Inc. V. Miller Bottles A New Test For State Regulation Of Insurance, Matthew G. Vansuch
Not Just Old Wine In New Bottles: Kentucky Ass'n Of Health Plans, Inc. V. Miller Bottles A New Test For State Regulation Of Insurance, Matthew G. Vansuch
Akron Law Review
For nearly two decades, the “regulating insurance” aspect of the savings clause was as confusing and convoluted as trying to distinguish between the casks of unlabeled barrels of old wine that all smelled horribly similar. Miller clarified the savings clause analysis by establishing a broad, two-step test for determining if a state law regulates insurance. However, the district courts have been sluggish in recognizing the differences between the tests. The Supreme Court did not even cite to or rely on Miller when it struck down Texas’ patient rights statute on the basis of ERISA preemption in Aetna Health Inc. v. …
Plan Sponsor Fiduciary Duty For The Selection Of Options In Participant-Directed Defined Contribution Plans And The Choice Between Stable Value And Money Market, Paul J. Donahue
Akron Law Review
This Article is divided into two parts. In Part I, this Article summarizes the scope of a Plan Sponsor’s fiduciary duty under ERISA and explains why that fiduciary duty extends to the selection of investment options for Participant-directed DC Plans (i.e., 404(c) Plans). In this context, the Article will then examine some of the safe harbor provisions applicable to 404(c) Plans, including the requirement that such Plans offer a low-risk-investment alternative and the requirement that such Plans provide adequate disclosure to Plan Participants about each investment alternative. In Part II, this Article will apply the law explicated in Part I …
Wilson V. Wilson: The Effect Of Qdros On Appealing Divorce Decrees, Joshua A. Dean
Wilson V. Wilson: The Effect Of Qdros On Appealing Divorce Decrees, Joshua A. Dean
Akron Law Review
In most divorces today, the largest asset held by the divorcing couple is a retirement fund belonging to one of the spouses. Courts invery state must decide how to divide a married couple’s property in order to provide each spouse his or her proper share. But when there are no assets large enough to offset the value of the retirement pension, divorce courts must find a way to “equitably distribute” the proceeds of the plan. Dealing with this large asset presented problems in the past as Congress sought to limit the ability to assign proceeds of retirement plans to anyone …