An ERISA case, Mills v. London Grove Township, decided by a Federal Judge in Pennsylvania did not allow the plan administrator to recover against a special needs trust set up for a dependant of the plan’s primary beneficiary. For anyone who deals with ERISA subrogation claims, the judge put his reasoning into reality when he states:
In the final analysis, the real dispute generated by ACS’s opposition is between ACS and the taxpayers who, in the future, will be called upon to bear the minor’s medical expenses. ACS was paid premiums for its coverage; the taxpayers have not been.
