Synergy Lien Resolution Service was able to resolve a large series of subrogation claims being asserted in unrelated matters by a large, regional grocery store corporation. These were cases in which the plaintiffs were members of the corporation’s self-funded ERISA health plan, which has very strong recovery language. The corporation has a policy of aggressively prosecuting their subrogation/reimbursement claims, wherein they typically demand and receive 100% repayment. The corporation is so aggressive they have even insisted that their claims administrator create a recovery group solely dedicated to collecting their repayment demands.
Despite this overly aggressive stance, Synergy has been able to leverage its knowledge, experience, and negotiation tactics to achieve a series of reductions ranging from 13% – 34%. The basis for the reductions was a fine splitting of hairs involving the “common fund” doctrine as expressed in U.S. Airways v. McCutchen versus the “attorney fee” language contained in the corporation’s Master Plan Document. Though the corporation maintains its position that their plan language does abrogate “common fund,” Synergy was able to convince their attorneys that the rationale of McCutchen might find their plan language lacking. This is a shining example of how Synergy’s ability to take advantage of the ever changing subrogation landscape can be used to benefit injured plaintiffs who are transitioning from litigation to life.
