Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Partsinevelos v. Tropical Machines, Inc.
Citation: 78 F. App'x 782Docket: Docket No. 03-7211
Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit; October 28, 2003; Federal Appellate Court
Maryann Partsinevelos appeals a February 6, 2003, order from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, which granted summary judgment to the defendants, Tropical, in her ERISA violation suit. The district court concluded that Partsinevelos lacked standing as she did not qualify as a "participant" under ERISA. Partsinevelos claims she was a participant entitled to medical benefits under Tropical’s plan with MDNY Healthcare, asserting she met the eligibility criteria. However, the court found that under the plan's terms, she needed to submit an enrollment form, which she did not do. Thus, she was not enrolled or entitled to benefits solely based on her eligibility. Partsinevelos further argued that Tropical’s alleged misconduct—misrepresenting her eligibility date and failing to provide enrollment forms—should excuse her failure to enroll. She cited Mullins v. Pfizer, Inc., which allows a claimant to achieve participant status if they can prove they would have enrolled but for the employer's misrepresentations. The court rejected this argument, noting she provided no evidence of reliance on the alleged misrepresentation about her eligibility, nor did she demonstrate that she would have applied for coverage had Tropical provided the enrollment forms. Furthermore, she did not inquire about enrollment until after she became ill, undermining her claims. Ultimately, the court found no triable issue of fact regarding whether Tropical terminated her employment due to her inquiries about coverage. The district court's judgment was affirmed.