Bixler V. Lucinda Bixler Case

This case was brought by Mrs. Lucinda Bixler after the death of her husband, Vaughn. Mr. Bixler was employed by a company called Drivers who supplied truck drivers to local firms and was also a member of Teamsters Local 776. This union established a fund to supply members with medical, disability, and life insurance which the Bixlers were paying into and receiving benefits from. This fund is designed to accept contributions from the members of the union in line with collective bargaining agreements establishing a number of different levels of coverage.
Mr. Bixler just happened to become ill during a time when the bargaining was at a stalemate and coverage was in jeopardy of being cut to the members of the union fund. The managers of the fund intended to raise the dues required for coverage from $165 to $277 per month and Drivers wouldn’t agree to the new rate. After an attempt to negotiate an agreement it was determined that the Fund’s coverage of …show more content…
Bixler stated she received the notice for coverage but it was after her husband was already in the hospital for the mortal heart condition. The notices had a 60 day opt-in period during which Mr. Bixler passed away. Both the fund and Drivers state they are not responsible for the medical bills incurred by Mr. Bixler, but it’s those medical costs Mrs. Bixler was trying to recoup. The court found the Fund was not liable since Mrs. Bixler was aware of the COBRA notice and had not elected coverage. The court did not rule on whether Drivers was liable for the medical costs as they did not determine if the employer was acting as a fiduciary in advising Mrs. Bixler. They could not determine if the employer knew about all the circumstances surrounding Mr. Bixler’s death and advising Mrs. Bixler to return the COBRA notice to elect coverage would allow payment of medical bills. The definition of whether the employer was acting as the Bixler’s fiduciary in this case was left to the lower court to