Good morning, ERISA Watchers!  This week’s notable decision is Tran v. Minnesota Life Ins. Co., No. 18-1723, __F.3d__, 2019 WL 1894769 (7th Cir. Apr. 29, 2019). The Seventh Circuit reversed the district court’s ruling finding that the insured’s death from autoerotic asphyxiation was an accidental death payable under his life insurance policy.  The Seventh Circuit held that a reasonable person would interpret the insured’s death from autoerotic asphyxiation to be death due to an “intentionally self-inflicted injury,” which is excluded from the life insurance policy.

If in addition to being unable to say “autoerotic asphyxiation” five times fast you also don’t know what it refers to, the Seventh Circuit noted its definition as “a sexual practice by which a person purposefully restricts blood flow to the brain to induce a feeling of euphoria. ‘Asphyxiophilia’ as defined in the DSM-5 is a subset of sexual masochism disorder, by which an ‘individual engages in the practice of achieving sexual arousal related to restriction of breathing.’” (citing to the 5th edition of the American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders).   Continue Reading Seventh Circuit Holds that Death by Autoerotic Asphyxiation Is Excluded under AD&D Policy

Good morning, ERISA Watchers!  There were several appellate court decisions this past week, but I want to highlight a district court case that presents a good lesson for employers and plan participants alike when it comes to changes to plan benefits.  In Boyles, Jr. v. American Heritage Life Insurance Company, et al., No. 3:15-CV-274, 2019 WL 1767565 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 22, 2019), Plaintiff Boyles brought suit for the denial of disability benefits against his former employer, St. Marys Insurance Agency; the president of his former employer, Jeffrey Azzato; the employer’s former long-term disability insurer, Allstate; and the employer’s current LTD insurer, Unum.  He also alleged that Azzato and St. Marys breached their fiduciary duties to him. Continue Reading Court Holds Employer Has No Affirmative Duty to Inform Participant of Change in Disability Insurers

Hello, ERISA Watchers!  Getting this out a day early so I could wish you all a Happy Passover, Easter, and Sunday!  This was another relatively slow week for ERISA decisions.  I expect it to pick back up over the next few weeks.  

This week’s notable decision is Skornick v. Principal Financial Group, et al., No. 18-CV-4324 (CS), 2019 WL 1723741 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 18, 2019), where the court determined that a group disability benefit policy purchased through Defendant Brooklyn Public Library (“the Library”) is subject to ERISA because it does not meet ERISA’s governmental plan exemption. Continue Reading Court Holds that Brooklyn Public Library Disability Plan is Not Subject to ERISA Governmental Plan Exemption