Selina Bryant v. Cigna Healthcare of California
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Selina Bryant appeals from the district court’s order granting summary judgment to appellees Connecticut General Life Insurance Company and Southwest Carpenters Health & Welfare Trust (“CGLIC”). CGLIC cross-appeals. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm the district court’s judgment, but vacate and remand for reconsideration of its order on the parties’ motions for attorney’s fees.
The trial court did not err when it decided which benefits plan is the operative one for Bryant’s claim, and the relevant plan language is clear: “all or any part of [the benefits] may be paid directly to the person or institution on whose charge [the] claim is based.” Bryant was not harmed as a result of CGLIC negotiating a reduced payment to Bryant’s medical provider; it is undisputed that CGLIC’s payment extinguished Bryant’s obligation to the hospital. Nor is there any indication that Bryant acted, or failed to act, to her detriment in reliance upon other versions of the plan she received from CGLIC. See Black’s Law Dictionary 1404 (9th ed.2009) (defining “reliance” and “detrimental reliance”). Bryant may have been harmed by the delay in processing her claim, but…