Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.

Judge Rules that El Paso Tennessee Pipeline Company Will Have to Pay Retiree Health Benefits Until Case is Decided

Report Fraud
Case ID: 3138 | Insurance | 02/09/2004

A class action has been filed against Case Corporation and successor to its former parent company, El Paso Tennessee Pipeline Company, on behalf of several thousand retirees and surviving spouses of retirees who worked for Case, who allege that El Paso is refusing to pay the cost for health care premiums for the group in violation of its contract with them. The action seeks an order forcing the company to cover the cost healthcare premiums as its predecessor did.

A group of six retirees and surviving spouses filed the action, alleging that El Paso and Case breached their labor agreements as well as their fiduciary responsibilities under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by demanding in the summer of 2002 that the retirees begin paying $290 per month for health care coverage, an amount that increased to $501 in January 2003. Although the court has not yet addressed the motion for class certification, it recently held that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits on their case and that members of the proposed class would suffer irreparable harm without an injunction. The injunction granted by the court requires that employer-paid health insurance benefits be restored for the retirees and their surviving spouses.

The United Auto Workers estimates the group includes 3,400 former employees who retired prior to October 3, 1993, and 1,500 dependent spouses. The retirees were represented by UAW when they worked at J.I. Case Company, a subsidiary of Tenneco that changed its name to Case Corporation in 1990. El Paso is the successor company to Tenneco; however, prior to Tenneco becoming part of El Paso in 1996, it spun off some assets from the parent company and from Case Corporation in an initial public offering. The new company, which is a separate defendant from El Paso, now is known as Case, LLC.

In finding the retirees faced substantial harm without an injunction, the court stated: "Unable to afford the $501 [monthly] premium, plaintiffs will lose their health care insurance, will not be able to pay for necessary prescription medications, and will not receive all the medical care they need. Reimbursing plaintiffs for their contributions at the end of the case, therefore, will not afford them relief." According to the court, a 1971 contract between Case and UAW provided that retired employees and their spouses who were eligible for pension benefits also would be eligible for major medical coverage and prescription drug benefits. Case agreed to pay the full premium cost for health care coverage for retirees and their spouses, regardless of age. Subsequent contracts contained similar language.

The final contract that applied to any of the group of retirees covered by the injunction was signed in 1990. It originally was set to expire in October 1993, but was extended in November 1993 through 1995. The extension agreement contained an appended letter from a Case senior vice president to the union's secretary-treasurer stating that average per capita annual costs to the company of providing medical benefits to retirees and surviving spouses would be capped at $2,750 for Medicare-eligible individuals and $8,500 for non-eligible persons. Despite the cap, no covered person would be required to pay a premium prior to April 1, 1998, according to the letter.

The court ruled that employees who retired after the October 3, 1993, date of the letter are not eligible for injunctive relief, and will apparently have to continue paying their own premiums.


At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints.

Other Insurance Cases of Interest

A class action has been filed against the Hartford Financial Services Group (NYSE: HIG) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company’s common stock between November 5, 2003 and October 13, 2004. The action claims that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company’s securities. The stockholders seek to recover compensatory damages for the loss of value of their stock.
 
A federal court in Louisiana has certified the class in a class action filed against Imperial Adjustment Company and Equifax Credit Information Services alleging that Equifax gave Imperial unrestricted access to the personal credit reports of approximately 150 class members.
 
A class action has been filed against Blue Cross of California on behalf of policyholders who allege that the insurer wrongfully changed their healthcare policies' premium basis from their age at initial enrollment to their attained ages at renewal time, in violation of the terms of the policies.
 
Kahn Gauthier Swick is investigating possible legal actions on behalf of persons injured or killed in motor vehicle accidents. Over 41,000 people are killed in motor vehicle accidents in the United States every year.
 
A class action lawsuit has been filed in the District Court of South Carolina against Tenet South Carolina, Inc., DBA Hilton Head Regional Medical Center. The case involves violations of contract law. No additional information about the substance of the allegations is available at this time. Classactionamerica.com will monitor this case and provide additional details as soon as they become available.
 
What good is insurance if it doesn’t pay up when you need it? The parties have reached a $20 million settlement in an action filed against Midwestern insurance company Central States Health and Life Company of Omaha on behalf of cancer patients and their families who alleged that the company refused to pay for certain treatments allegedly covered under cancer insurance policies it sold, in violation of its contracts with the patients. Persons eligible to take part in the settlement should contact class counsel for more information.
 
Become a LawCash Member - FREE!
'Find Money' E-Book
Weekly Email Alerts




privacy policy
YouNewz Beta
IT'S FREE

Report

Report Newz and easily upload your own newzworthy photos from your cell phone or computer to the web.

Share

Quickly share your photos with family, friends, co-workers, or the world with your own Newzpaper.

Read

Instantly find Newz and photos from other YouNewzers and read other YouNewzers Newzpapers.
 
Class Action Lawsuit Center || Product Recall Center || Consumer Complaint Center || About LawCash Link Exchange
Privacy Policy || Legal Policies || Terms & Conditions || Website Advertising Policy || Site Map || Top Lawsuits
LawCash® is a service of nola3, llc
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.

[ Home ]
LawCash
login
Justice is a click away.