Thomas Chapleau v. Care America, Southern California

87 F.3d 1317 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Thomas CHAPLEAU, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CARE AMERICA, SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, Defendant-Appellee. No. 94-56776. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted June 4, 1996. Decided June 14, 1996. Before: FARRIS, FERNANDEZ, and THOMAS, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Thomas Chapleau appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of CareAmerica in this action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (a)(1)(B). Chapleau opposes summary judgment on two grounds: 1) there is a genuine question as to whether the treatment in Indiana after June 28, 1992, was "emergency treatment"; and 2) he deserves equitable relief for CareAmerica's unjust enrichment. 1. Emergency Treatment The CareAmerica plan states that: 3 CareAmerica will not pay charges incurred for services from other than your Primary Care Physician unless: (1) an Emergency exists, or (2) the…