Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Personal Jurisdiction: D. Alaska

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Personal Jurisdiction: D. Alaska

    In a recent case from the District of Alaska, Cigna, the Defendant, filed a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, arguing that "Cigna is not an insurance company, but a stock holding company with no involvement with the Plan and no contacts with Alaska sufficient to permit this court to exercise personal jurisdiction over Cigna Corporation consistent with due process." In doing so, Cigna proffers that the court has neither general nor specific personal jurisdiction over them. The Plaintiff, in opposition of the motion, asserts the following:

    Plaintiff asserts that Cigna can be sued under § 1132 as a “claims administrator.”38 In support of this contention, Plaintiff submits documents from Plaintiff’s insurance claim file, as well as Cigna promotional materials. Plaintiff received a number of letters from Cigna concerning his claim under the STS LTD Plan. These letters contain the Cigna logo and a return address referencing “Cigna” along with a PO Box in Phoenix, Arizona, and are signed by Cigna employees, including a “Group Claims Associate,” “Claim Manager,” and “Appeal Specialist.”Plaintiff also notes that Cigna’s promotional materials for Long Term Disability insurance reference “[o]ur experienced LTD claim managers,” and that Cigna “hires claims persons and managers under the name CIGNA.” Plaintiff therefore maintains that he has “established genuine issue of material fact regarding who CIGNA Group Claims is.”
    In response, Cigna points out that the letters submitted by Plaintiff contain notices stating that “‘Cigna’ and the ‘Tree of Life’ logo are registered service marks of Cigna Intellectual Property, Inc., licensed for use by Cigna Corporation and its operating subsidiaries,” and that “[a]ll products and services are provided by or through such operating subsidiaries, including Life Insurance Company of North America, Connecticut General Life Insurance Company and Cigna Life Insurance Company of New York, and not by Cigna Corporation.” The letters also expressly list “Life Insurance Company of North America” as the “Underwriting Company” for the STS LTD policy, and LINA, in its answer in this case, admits sending the letters contained in Plaintiff’s claims file concerning Plaintiff’s termination of benefits and his appeal.
    Ultimately, the court rules in favor of the Defendant and finds that it should be dismissed from the case. The entire opinion is attached below.
    Attached Files
Working...
X