Weiner v. Southwest Airlines Co. Funded Welfare Benefit Plan
No. 3-01-CV-2183-M (N.D. Tex. Feb. 15, 2002)

Plaintiff, a podiatrist who provided medical services to patients insured under various health insurance plans pursuant to a fee-for-service arrangement with the insurance companies, sued an employer welfare benefit plan in state court, alleging that it was indebted to him for payment for medical services for an individual covered by the plan. One week later, plaintiff amended his petition and joined the plan’s health insurance company as a party to the state court action. The defendant timely removed the case to federal court on the basis of ERISA preemption, and plaintiff then filed a motion to remand back to state court, which was denied, since the only viable claim alleged by plaintiff in his state court petition was as “the assignee of an ERISA plan beneficiary.” When plaintiff subsequently sought leave to amend his complaint to assert new claims arising solely under state law (and not preempted by ERISA), defendants objected.

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas held that plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend should be granted in part and denied in part. Plaintiff should be permitted to amend his complaint to assert claims against the insurance company for quantum meruit, breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, and violations of the Texas Theft Liability Act. In all other respects, the motion was denied. The federal court also denied plaintiff’s renewed motion to remand to state small claims court and denied the cross-motion of the defendant benefit plan for sanctions against plaintiff.