Free Trial / Sign Up Products / Prices / Samples About Us / Contact FAQs Home
Latest employment law cases  
Summaries and links to full text

LawMemo - First in Employment Law

Emailed directly to you
and online all the time
Latest Cases Key Word Search Law Firm Directory Arbitrator Directory Law School Directory Legal Resources / Memos
Employment Law Memo
Arbitration Law Memo
NLRB Law Memo
Employment Law Blog
Arbitration Law Blog
Employment Law 101
Articles
Supreme Court Cases
EEOC Info
NLRB Info

LawMemo Employment Law Blog 
All Archives    |    All Archives By Topic 
Also read LawMemo Arbitration Blog

 


« Employment law verdict reports | Main | Inflatable rats featured in NLRB General Counsel report »

Workers compensation is not an employee benefit plan
June 15, 2006 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo

When Howard Delivery Service went bankrupt, it owed Zurich American Insurance $400,000 on account of unpaid workers compensation insurance premiums.

Zurich filed a creditor's claim, asserting that the premiums were entitled to priority on the ground that they were unpaid "contributions to an employee benefit plan" under 11 USC Section 507(a)(4).

The US Supreme Court held (6-3) that workers compensation premiums fall outside the priority allowed by Section 507(a)(4). Howard Delivery Service v. Zurich American Ins (US Supreme Court 06/15/2006)

Employment Law Memo notified its readers about this case on 06/15/2006, shortly after it was decided.

The Supreme Court said such premiums are more appropriately bracketed with liability insurance premiums (e.g., motor vehicle, fire and theft) than with contributions made for fringe benefits that complete a pay package (e.g., pension plans, group health, life, disability).

Interesting logic: The primary reason is that workers compensation regimes provide something for employees (payments for injuries) and also something for employers (avoiding tort litigation and large judgments).

The dissent's logic: workers compensation insurance qualifies as an "employee benefit plan" because it clearly provides benefits to employees.

Interesting combination of Justices:

Majority: Ginsburg, Roberts, Stevens, Scalia, Thomas, Breyer.
Dissent: Kennedy, Souter, Alito.

LawMemo.Com


EEOC | NLRB | Supreme CourtEmployment Law BlogArbitration Blog | Employment Law 101

 
Google
 
Web www.LawMemo.com 
This form will search the LawMemo web site. 
It does not include Advanced Search.