Alaska Employment Law

ERISA limitations period:  U. S. District Judge Timothy Burgess has dismissed a claim for disability benefits under ERISA § 502(a)(1)(B), finding no abuse of discretion in the administrator’s denial.  In the process, Burgess resolved several issues not yet established by the 9th Circuit.  He held that Alaska’s 3-year contract limitations period applies to benefit appeals.  He held that federal law permits the Plan to contractually modify the limitations period, but not the accrual point.  But Burgess refused to enforce a contractual limitation that was not disclosed in either the Plan Summary or the denial letter.  LaSuer v. HCA Inc., Case No. 3:07-cv-00230-TMB (D.Alaska Order of Mar. 31, 2009). 

“Serve” v. “distribute”: “[D]ocuments distributed by courts are not ’served.’  Parties, not courts, ’serve’ documents.”  Shea v. State of Alaska, Dep’t of Admin., Op. No. 6358, at p. 6 (Alaska Apr. 10, 2009). 

In that case, the appellant was wrong to add 3 days from date of distribution when calculating her response date.  But the Court has, in the meantime (effective January 1, 2009), amended Appellate Rule 502(c) to give an extra 3 days from date of distribution, as well as date of service. 

The current App.R. 502(c), thus, provides:

 (c) Additional Time After Service or Distribution by Mail. Whenever a party has the right or is required to act within a prescribed number of days after the service or distribution of a document, and the document is served or distributed by mail, three calendar days shall be added to the prescribed period. However, no additional time shall be added if a court order specifies a particular calendar date by which an act must occur.

(Emph. added.)

Arbitrator subpoenas:  Adjunct Law Professor discusses, and links to an article about the power of FAA-based arbitrators to issue subpoenas to third parties.