Hamilton v. Mecca, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that plan participant did not receive proper notice under § 503, but declining to remand because there was “no question that [he] should have received coverage” under the policy
• § 1132(a) “limits a plaintiffs recovery to the contractually-defined benefits that the plaintiff has been denied under his or her ERISA plan.”
• appropriate remedy for administrator's failure to provide plaintiff adequate notice of his right to continued coverage under COBRA is the total amount of medical expenses that were not reimbursed as a result of defendant's failure
• appropriate remedy for administrator’s failure to provide plaintiff adequate notice of his right to continued coverage under COBRA is the total amount of medical expenses that were not reimbursed as a result of defendant’s failure
• “Although [the administrator] could be required to pay as much as $11,100.00 in penalties under § 502(c) (up to $100 per day x 111 days), the Court concludes that an award of $5,000 is ‘sufficient to accomplish the salutary purposes of the statute in this particular case.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).