Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co.
| Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co. and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Argued October 15, 2013 Decided December 16, 2013 | |
| Full case name | Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co. and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. |
| Docket no. | 12-729 |
| Citations | 571 U.S. 99 (more) 134 S. Ct. 604; 187 L. Ed. 2d 529; 2013 U.S. LEXIS 9026; 82 U.S.L.W. 4035; 57 EBC 1265 |
| Argument | Oral argument |
| Case history | |
| Prior | Case dismissed, No. 3:10-cv-1813 (D. Conn. Jan. 20, 2012); affirmed, 496 F. App'x 129 (2d Cir. Ct. 2012). |
| Holding | |
| Absent a controlling statute to the contrary, a participant in an employee benefit plan covered by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) and the plan may agree by contract to a particular limitations period, even one that starts to run before the cause of action accrues, as long as the period is reasonable. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinion | |
| Majority | Thomas, joined by unanimous |
| Laws applied | |
| Employee Retirement Income Security Act | |
Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., 571 U.S. 99 (2013), is a United States Supreme Court case. In this case, the court considered whether the agreed-upon limitations period for filing a legal objection to long-term disability denial began when the claim was filed or the claim received a final denial.[1] In a unanimous decision, the court ruled the agreed-upon limitations period is neither too short nor is there a statute that prevents it from taking effect, as such the courts are bound to enforce the limitations period and its start date as written in the coverage plan.[2]
References
[edit]- ^ Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., No. 12–729, 571 U.S. 99 (2013).
- ^ "Supreme Court Decision in Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co., et al., in Alignment with DRI Amicus Brief". Archived from the original on August 8, 2014. Retrieved August 2, 2014.
External links
[edit]- Text of Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co., 571 U.S. 99 (2013) is available from: Cornell CourtListener Google Scholar Justia Oyez (oral argument audio) Supreme Court (slip opinion) (archived)
 | This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |