Van Hulle v. Pacific Telesis Corp.

Good Law
124 F. Supp. 2d 642·2000 WL 1808553·11 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 557·2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17914
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 8, 200000-20331California2,693 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fogel, J.

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS WITH LEAVE TO AMEND

Defendant Cigna Healthcare of California (“Cigna”) moves for dismissal of Plaintiffs complaint. Plaintiff Jeffrey Van Hulle (“Van Hulle”) opposes the motion and alternatively asks the Court for leave to amend his complaint in order to assert a cause of action under the Employment Retirement Income Securities Act (“ERISA”). The Court has read the moving and responding papers and has considered the oral arguments of counsel. For the reasons set forth below, Cigna’s motion to dismiss will be granted without leave to amend as to Van Hulle’s claims under the American with Disability Act (“ADA”) and with leave to amend as to Van Hulle’s proposed ERISA claim.

I.BACKGROUND

The complaint asserts that Defendants Cigna, Prudential Healthcare, and Pacific Telesis violated the ADA. Van Hulle works for Pacific Telesis, which contracted with Cigna and Prudential Healthcare for administration of its employee insurance health benefits. Van Hulle alleges that Defendants administered the insurance policy in a discriminatory manner by refusing him services and treating him differently because of his disability. Specifically, the complaint…

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.