Spinedex Physical Therapy USA Inc. v. United Healthcare of Arizona, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that patients had assigned the health care provider their “rights to bring suit for payment of benefits”
• holding that an ERISA plan administrator can be liable if it “cause[s] improper denial of benefits”
• holding that assignments signed by plan beneficiaries did not manifest an intent to assign claims to health care providers for breach of fiduciary duty under ERISA
• holding that “an administrator may not hold in reserve a known or reasonably knowable reason for denying a claim, and give that reason for the first time when the claimant challenges a benefits denial in court.”
• stating that only a plan participant, 7\\| beneficiary, fiduciary, or valid assignee is the injured party and may bring an ERISA 8 || claim
• noting that beneficiaries who assigned to their provider the right to 16 seek payment of benefits could not themselves seek payment of those claims

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).