The U.S. Supreme Court in a unanimous decision has ruled that contractual limitations periods in ERISA plans are enforceable. The only two qualifications that such limitation periods must satisfy is that they must be reasonable in length and not prohibited by another applicable statute.In the instant case, the Supreme Court dealt with a disability plan that contained a 3-year limitations period. The 3-year limitations period began on the day the person became disabled, not on the day that the final appeal was denied. The court said that beginning the limitations period on the date of disability was appropriate. ERISA’s claim and appeal procedures are established to last about 1 year, giving a person in a typical case 2 years to file suit in court. In the instant case, the person’s claim and appeal process lasted longer than normal and she only had 1 year to file a claim after her final appeal. Again the Supreme Court indicated that this was sufficient time to file suit. Even though this case dealt with a disability plan, the case applies to any employee benefit plan governed by ERISA. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-729_q8l1.pdf
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.