Harris Corporation v. Humana Health Insurance Company of Florida, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
253 F.3d 598 (2001)
Margaret Shallenberger was employed by Harris Corporation (Harris) (plaintiff) and enrolled in the Harris health-insurance plan. At the time, Shallenberger was already covered by her husband’s employer-sponsored plan with Humana Health Insurance Company of Florida, Inc. (Humana) (defendant). The Humana plan had a coordination of benefits (COB) provision, which coordinates health-insurance benefits of families with two wage earners. The Harris plan did not have a COB provision. Under the Humana COB provision, if a family had plans with and without COB provisions, the plan without a COB provision was considered to determine its benefits before a plan with the COB provision. Therefore, the plan with a COB provision could determine priority with respect to a plan without a COB provision. In 1992, Shallenberger became sick and decided to purchase long-term disability insurance through Harris. Shallenberger qualified for Medicare. Shallenberger died in December 1995. Harris paid $780,267.88 in benefits for Shallenberger. Harris submitted a reimbursement claim to Medicare for Shallenberger’s medical bills. Medicare refused to pay, because Shallenberger had coverage under Humana. Harris submitted a claim to Humana, but Humana refused to pay. Litigation commenced. The trial court determined that, because the Humana policy had a COB provision but the Harris policy did not, the Harris policy was primary. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Humana. Harris appealed, arguing that the Medicare Secondary Payer Act (MSPA) made Humana primarily liable for the costs of Shallenberger’s health care, despite the provisions in the health plans.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Per Curiam)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 724,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 724,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,600 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.