"Appropriate Equitable Relief" in Wal-Mart v. Shank: Justice for Whom?

Andrew H. Koslow, Boston College Law School

Abstract

Deborah Shank suffered severe, disabling injuries in a 2000 auto accident. She received a settlement from the trucking company involved in the accident that amounted to only a small fraction of the millions dollars in damages that she suffered. To make things even worse, Ms. Shank’s health plan sued her under ERISA section 502(a)(3) for reimbursement of the medical bills it paid on her behalf and won, taking the entire amount of the settlement. This article examines the tension between the relevant ERISA provision and reimbursement clauses found in health plan enrollment contracts, and suggests that the courts’ interpretation of the meaning of section 502, as well as the purpose of ERISA as it applies to this and similar cases, is flawed.