Jacaruso v. Walters
Conflicting holdings exist on the question of whether, and under what circumstances, the pre-emption and jurisdictional provisions of the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) prevent employer-funded health care providers from asserting subrogation rights in state courts. Thus, the trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to reduce the amount of the plaintiff's judgment by the amount of a lien asserted by the plaintiff's health care provider and purchased by defendant. At the time the judgment was entered no funds were in plaintiff's possession and thus the existence of a lien would not support any reduction in the amount of the judgment. Judgment Affirmed.
Comments on Jacaruso v. Walters