Legal Opinion

David Austell v. Raymond James & Associates, Incorporated

Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Decided July 22, 1997No. 96-1974PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge COPENHAVER wrote the opinion, in which Chief Judge WILKINSON and Judge MICHAEL joined.

OPINION

COPENHAVER, District Judge:

The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court erred in determining that the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA), 29 U.S.C.A. § 1161(a), does not require sponsors of employee welfare benefit plans to offer continuation coverage for disability insurance.

Section 1161(a) provides:

The plan sponsor of each group health plan shall provide, in accordance with this part, that each qualifying beneficiary who would lose…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Standard Oil Company of California v. Joshua C. AgsaludCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
  2. Standard Oil Co. of California v. AgsaludDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1977
  3. Drayton Heard and Elizabeth A. Heard v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1959
  4. Local 217 Hotel & Restaurant Employees Union v. MHM, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1991
  5. Moffitt v. Whittle Communications, L.P.District Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1995

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Lauder v. First Unum Life InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1999
  2. Noel v. Laclede Gas Co.District Court, E.D. Missouri · 2009
  3. Bellah v. American Airlines, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API