Connecticut Federal Court: ERISA Plan Can Pursue Subrogation Claim Against Participant
Another federal court has addressed the divisive issue of whether plans may sue their participants under ERISA for subrogation or reimbursement. In Great-West Life & Annuity Co. v. Knudson, 534 U.S. 204 (2002), the Supreme Court ruled that ERISA plans may sue participants for equitable, but not legal, relief. Various circuit courts are split on whether a suit filed by an ERISA plan for subrogation or reimbursement is equitable in nature and thus allowed. Click here to read my earlier posting on this topic.
In Scholastic Corp. v. Kassem, the U.S. District Court in Connecticut took the position that suits by ERISA plans for subrogation are equitable in nature, thus clearing the way for the Scholastic Corp. plan to recover its subrogation interest. The Court engaged in a lengthy analysis of Great-West and its progeny. The site for the yet-unpublished Connecticut decision is Scholastic Corp. v. Kassem, 2005 WL 2276042 (D. Conn. Sept. 19, 2005).