Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
W. A. Griffin v. United Healthcare of Georgia, Inc., et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, No. 18-10208
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Questions presented
-
Whether or not a plan administrator and/or plan fiduciary of an ERISA governed welfare benefit plan waived the rights to assert provider antiassignment provisions when plan fiduciaries failed to notify the provider of the antiassignment provision during the administrative appeals process.' 'Recently, the 11 th circuit has suggested that the State of Georgia does not have a mandatory provider assignment of benefit statue that expressly prohibits provider anti-assigment clauses. See Georgia § 33-24-54. See Griffin v. Focus Brands, Inc., 635 Fed.Appx. 796 (2015); Also, if - Georgia did have an anti-assignment clause, the 11th Circuit has stated that it would not be preempted by ERISA. See Griffin v. Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc.686 Fed.Appx. 820, 11th Cir.(Ga:), Apr. 27,
-
As such, the question in this petition focuses on conduct that waives provider anti-assignment provisions in plan documents.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
W. A. Griffin
For respondent
Cavender Crosby Kimble
Balch & Bingham
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Mar 26 2018Petition DENIED.
- Mar 07 2018DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/23/2018.
- Mar 01 2018Waiver of right of respondent United Healthcare of Georgia, Inc. to respond filed.
- Feb 26 2018Waiver of right of respondent Viking Range, LLC to respond filed.
- Jan 23 2018Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment filed. (Response due March 1, 2018)