Johnson v. Reserve Life Insurance

Good Law
765 F. Supp. 1478·1991 WL 113148·13 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2685·1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8683
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaJune 5, 1991CV 90-5869 SVW(GHKx)California3,428 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wilson, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT MIDLAND’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT RE COBRA CONTINUATION COVERAGE

INTRODUCTION

This case involves an employee who was severely injured and rendered a quadriplegic in a non-work related accident. Plaintiffs employer, defendant Assured Content Restoration (“Assured”), had obtained group medical insurance for its employees through defendant Reserve Life Insurance Co. (“Reserve”). Plaintiff claims that her benefits were wrongfully terminated by the insurer and that she has been wrongfully denied continuation coverage or conversion to an individual policy. The court previously held that the health insurance provided to plaintiff was a plan subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, Pub.L. No. 93-406, 88 Stat. 832 (codified as amended at 29 U.S.C. section 1001 et seq.) (“ERISA”). 761 F.Supp. 93 . Also, the court previously granted partial summary judgment to defendant Midland National Life Insurance Co. (“Midland”), successor-in-interest to Reserve, on plaintiffs claims for mandated benefits under California law, finding that the law of Alabama rather than California applied to the extent state law was not preempted by ERISA. The basis…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.