COBRA Coverage Notices Are Being Widely Challenged in Court

Written on .

The Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) requires employers to issue notices to employees that there are options to continue healthcare coverage at their own expense following their termination or certain reductions in work hours. While applicable rules set forth the requirements of such notices, COBRA provisions also include a potential for fines of as much as $110 per employee per day. 

As a result, certain plaintiffs' law firms are getting involved in suing large employers for failure to meet the legal details in the notices.  Over 50 cases have been filed in federal court over the last four years, many of them resulting in large settlements: Home Depot settled a case for $815,000, Fiat Chrysler settled for $600,000, and Costco agreed to pay $750,000.  Most of the cases are based on an allegation that the COBRA notices do not contain required information, that they are too complicated for people to understand, or that they were designed to scare people from filing for COBRA by warning against filing false information.  In an unusual move, the U.S. Department of Labor has filed an amicus brief supporting one employer, Southwest Airlines, saying the argument used by many plaintiffs' law firms is wrong.  The plaintiffs' firms have argued that COBRA notices incorrectly fail to include contact information for health plan administrators, but the DOL in its brief says that their regulations allow for COBRA notices to include contact information for those responsible for administering COBRA benefits. 

Because of this new litigation target by plaintiffs' firms, wise employers will take a look at their COBRA notices to make sure they are clear and consistent with legal requirements.

This is part of our June 2022 Newsletter.

View newsletter online

Download the newsletter as a PDF

Get Email Updates

Receive newsletters and alerts directly in your email inbox. Sign up below.

Recent Content

microphone, indoors

Union Organizing Efforts across the Country Continue to Draw Attention

Recent Gallup polls indicate that the public has a favorable opinion of unions with a near record high of 68%, and with the "great resign...
supreme court of the united states

Supreme Court Explains Limits to Arbitration Exceptions to Court Litigation

A majority of employees in the U.S. are now covered by individual arbitration agreements prohibiting them from bringing lawsuits in court...
bullseye target, darts

10 Things That Might Make Your Company an Attractive Target to a Plaintiff's Lawyer

Wimberly & Lawson attorneys Kathleen Jennings, Paul Oliver, and Jim Wimberly conducted a webinar on June 2, 2022, dealing with the ab...
person completing documents, indoors on a table with a mug

Employer Wins Lawsuit over Background Checks Even Though It Failed to Show Applicant Copy of the Report

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) places a number of obligations on employers who use third-party background or credit check companies...
interview between a man and woman indoors

E17: The Bad Job Interview

In this episode, host Thom Jennings and attorney Kathleen Jennings discuss a Reddit post about a job interview that went terribly wrong. ...

Wimberly, Lawson, Steckel, Schneider & Stine

3400 Peachtree Road, Ste 400 / Lenox Towers / Atlanta, GA 30326 /404.365.0900

Where Experience Counts


Thank you for visiting the firm's website. Please note that this website is intended for general information purposes only and does not constitute an offer of representation or create an attorney-client relationship with the firm. The firm welcomes receipt of electronic mail but the act of sending electronic mail alone does not create an attorney-client relationship. You may reproduce materials available at this site for your own personal use and for non-commercial distribution. All copies must include the firm's copyright notice.

© 2022 Wimberly, Lawson, Steckel, Schneider & Stine P.C. | Site By JSM