No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Plaintiff prevailed on her ERISA benefits claim. The court awarded $142,205.00 in benefits based on a negotiated single-case agreement rate, plus $15,700.37 in prejudgment interest, totaling $157,905.37.
This case involved Jamie F., who filed a lawsuit against UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company under ERISA, a federal law that governs employee benefit plans like health insurance and retirement accounts.
While the court document excerpt doesn't provide specific details about Jamie F.'s complaint, ERISA cases typically involve disputes over denied insurance claims, wrongfully terminated benefits, or problems accessing retirement funds that employees believe they're entitled to receive.
What the Court Decided:
The court dismissed Jamie F.'s case, meaning the lawsuit was thrown out without any money being awarded. The dismissal indicates that either the court found Jamie F. didn't have a valid legal claim, the case was filed improperly, or there were other procedural issues that prevented the case from moving forward.
What This Means for Workers:
This case highlights that winning ERISA disputes can be challenging. When you have problems with employer-provided benefits, it's important to carefully follow all plan procedures and deadlines before filing a lawsuit. ERISA cases have strict rules and time limits, and courts often defer to insurance companies' decisions unless there's clear evidence of wrongdoing or procedural violations.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Other orders and opinions in Jamie F. v. UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company from the same court.
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.