Moreover, when deciding a motion to dismiss, a court may look beyond the pleadings and consider document[s] integral to or explicitly relied upon in the complaint,' or any undisputedly authentic document that a defendant attaches as an exhibit to a motion to dismiss if the plaintiff's claims are based on the document. Id. PO Box 10128 | Detroit, MI 48210 | (313) 842-2600 | [emailprotected], Teamsters Rank and File Education and Legal Defense Foundation, PO Box 10303 | Detroit, MI 48210 | (313) 842-2615 | [emailprotected], Copyright 2015 | All Rights Reserved. calls for UPS Teamsters to learn more about the Teamsters Western Region & Local 177 Health Care Plan. 2008)), but simply confers on the agent the authority to act on behalf of the principal,' id. . JOSEPH HUTCHINS, by his attorney in fact CYNTHIA TAINSH, under a power of attorney, Plaintiffs, v. TEAMSTERS WESTERN REGION AND LOCAL 177 HEALTHCARE PLAN, et al., Defendants. An 11-minute DVD is also available, and will be sent out prior to the upcoming re-vote on the UPS contract in the west. Defendant contends that Plaintiff's claims must be dismissed because the POA is, in fact, an assignment disguised as a power of attorney, which is barred by the anti-assignment provision in Mr. Hutchins' insurance plan, and that the Complaint is actually an attempt by the provider to collect against the plan in the guise of a claim brought by the patient where such action is barred by the New Jersey Out of Network Consumer Protection Transparency, Cost, Containment and Accountability Act (NJNSA). (D.E. 2008) (stating that Rule 8 requires a showing,' rather than a blanket assertion, of an entitlement to relief (quoting Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555)). Cal. Action to Enforce a Plan Benefit Pursuant to U.S.C. In American Orthopedic & Sports Medicine v. Independence Blue Cross Blue Shield, the Third Circuit held that anti-assignment clauses in ERISA-governed health insurance plans as a general matter are enforceable. 890 F.3d 445, 453 (3d Cir. about $15 for a doctor visit. In Tamburrino, M.D., et al. Plaintiff's counsel concedes as much by admitting that in this case, there is no dispute between the patient (Plaintiff) and his medical provider. (D.E. The authority to act on behalf of the principal' is the primary issue at hand in this matter. All states will probably follow Cali's lead. Local 177 Retire Healthcare Coverage | UPS Union Issues 1984)). page numbers referenced throughout this Opinion reference the filing page numbers, not each document's original page number. One patient was covered Teamsters Western Region and Local 177 Health Care Plan - Amendments
Beautiful Skin In Other Languages, Proto Germanic Translator, Shin Pain After Meniscus Surgery, Articles T