Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/524bv.pdf
Page Number: 121

524us1$75Z 02-18-99 19:35:21 PAGES OPINPGT

76

GEISSAL v. MOORE MEDICAL CORP.

Opinion of the Court

Bradley J. Washburn argued the cause and ﬁled a brief

for respondents.*

Justice Souter delivered the opinion of the Court.
The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
(ERISA), as amended by the Consolidated Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA), authorizes a qualiﬁed
beneﬁciary of an employer’s group health plan to obtain con-
tinued coverage under the plan when he might otherwise
lose that beneﬁt for certain reasons, such as the termination
of employment. The issue in this case is whether 29 U. S. C.
§ 1162(2)(D)(i) allows an employer to deny COBRA continua-
tion coverage to a qualiﬁed beneﬁciary who is covered under
another group health plan at the time he makes his COBRA
election. We hold that it does not.

I

On July 16, 1993, respondent Moore Medical Corporation
ﬁred James Geissal, who was suffering from cancer. While
employed, Geissal was covered under Moore’s group health
plan as well as the health plan provided by his wife’s em-
ployer, Trans World Airlines (TWA), through Aetna Life In-
surance Company.

According to Geissal, soon after he lost his job, Moore told
him that he had a right under COBRA to elect to continue
coverage under Moore’s plan. Geissal so elected, and made
the necessary premium payments for six months. On Janu-
ary 27, 1994, however, Moore informed Geissal it had been
mistaken: he was not actually entitled to COBRA beneﬁts

*Gill Deford, Mary Ellen Signorille, Melvin Radowitz, Daniel Fein-
berg, and Ronald G. Dean ﬁled a brief for the American Association of
Retired Persons et al. as amici curiae urging reversal.

Ray M. Aragon, Barbara J. Bacon, and Jeffrey Gabardi ﬁled a brief for
the Health Insurance Association of America as amicus curiae urging
afﬁrmance.