BRANNIGAN
v.
ANTHEM INSURANCE COMPANIES, INC.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court granted the motion to dismiss because the plaintiff failed to establish statutory standing and failed to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6).
Plaintiffs sued Defendant Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield. Defendant moved to dismiss the ERISA claim. The Magistrate Judge recommended granting the…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Anti-Assignment Clause cases and more on FLexlaw
oppose the motion. (Doc. 20.) The motion was referred to the Magistrate Judge, who issued a Report and Recommendation that the motion to dismiss be granted. (Id.) The fourteen-day deadline for Plaintiffs to object to the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation has passed with no objection from Plaintiffs, so the Court treats the Recommendation as unopposed. Nevertheless, the Court reviews the Magistrate Judge’s legal conclusions de
novo. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Ashworth v. Glades Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 379 F. Supp. 3d 1244, 1246 (M.D. Fla. 2019) (Steele,
After a careful and complete review, the Court adopts the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation and grants Anthem’s motion to dismiss for two reasons. First, the Court
agrees with the Magistrate Judge that Plaintiffs’ Complaint fails to establish that Jet ICU has statutory standing to bring an ERISA claim given the operative plan’s anti-assignment provisions and the failure to allege written permission for an assignment of benefits to Jet ICU. See Surgery Ctr. of Viera, LLC v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Fla., Inc., No. 6:19- cv-630, 2019 WL 5393817, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 10, 2019) (Berger, J.). Second, the Court also agrees that Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted under Rule 12(b)(6) because the Complaint fails to identify the specific provisions of the operative plan under which Plaintiffs seek recovery. See Sanctuary Surgical Ctr., Inc. v. UnitedHealth Grp., Inc., No. 10-cv-81589, 2013 WL 149356, at *3 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 14, 2013) (Hurley, J.). Accordingly, the following is ORDERED:
1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED and made a part of this order for all purposes. (Doc. 33.)
2. Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Complaint is GRANTED. (Doc. 19.)
3. By May 20, 2022, Plaintiffs may file an amended complaint to correct the deficiencies identified by the Magistrate Judge. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on May 12, 2022.
patron Mizelle United States District Judge
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brannigan v. Anthem Ins. Cos., Inc., 2019 WL 5393817 (M.D. Fla. 2019)…an ERISA claim given the operative plan’s anti-assignment provisions and the failure to allege written permission for an assignment of benefits to Jet ICU. See Surgery Ctr. of Viera, LLC v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Fla., Inc., No. 6:19- cv-630, 2019 WL 5393817, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 10, 2019) (Berger, J.). Second, the Court also agrees that Plaintiffs have failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted under Rule 12(b)(6) because the Complaint fails to identify the specific provisions of the oper…1 / 2
-
Cardoso v. Comm'r of Soc. Sec. (M.D. Fla. 2023)
-
United States v. Shandles (M.D. Fla. 2023)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Marina Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603 (11th Cir. 1994)
- Ashworth v. Glades Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 379 F. Supp. 3d 1244 (M.D. Fla. 2019)
- Brannigan v. Anthem Ins. Cos., Inc., 2019 WL 5393817 (M.D. Fla. 2019)