Legal Opinion
Hobbs v. Blue Cross Blue Shield
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Decided December 21, 2001No. 01-10019PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED OPINION
Before BIRCH, COX and ALARCÓN,* Circuit Judges. ALARCÓN, Circuit Judge:
Norman Hobbs and Samuel Irvine appeal from the denial of their motion to remand this action to state court. They contend that the district court erred in recharacterizing their state insurance law claim against Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama (“Blue Cross”) as “arising under” the Employee Retirement Income Se*1239curity Act of 1974 (“ERISA”)1 because they lack standing under ERISA to bring an action for the payment of their services as physician assistants.
Hobbs and Irvine also argue that the district court…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Bell v. HoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- University of South Alabama v. American Tobacco Co.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1999
- Jacqueline Burns v. Windsor Insurance Co.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1994
- Hca Health Services of Georgia, Inc. v. Employers Health Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2001
- Cagle v. BrunerCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1997
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hobbs v. Blue Cross Blue Shield Of AlabamaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2001
- National Renal Alliance, LLC v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Georgia, Inc.District Court, N.D. Georgia · 2009
- Haymond v. LundyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2002
- Bloom v. Independence Blue CrossDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2015
- Daybreak, Inc. v. FriedbergDistrict Court, Virgin Islands · 2013