Petar Misic v. The Building Service Employees Health and Welfare Trust

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that when “[t]he Supreme Court reverse[s] this court, but on other grounds,” it leaves unchanged the law of this circuit on issues not reached by the Court
• holding healthcare provider, “as assignee of beneficiaries pursuant 25 to assignments valid under ERISA, has standing to assert the claims of his assignors”
• reasoning that “[h]ealth and welfare benefit trust funds are designed to finance health care,” and the “[assignment of trust monies to health- care providers results in precisely the benefit the trust is designed to provide and the statute is designed to protect”
• demonstrating that a provider of health care services that obtains an 23 assignment of benefits from a participant or beneficiary of an employer-sponsored 24 health benefit plan may bring a civil suit to recover benefits due under the plan
• noting the “familiar principle 14 that the assignee stands in the shoes of the assignor, and, if the assignment is valid, has 15 standing to assert whatever rights the assignor possessed”
• “ERISA does not forbid 12 assignment by a beneficiary of his right to reimbursement under a health care plan 13 to the health care provider”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).