Preview:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN DIVISION

CHRYSTELE McKANDES, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No. AW-00-3758 BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD ASSOC., et. al., Defendants.

MEMORANDUM OPINION This case arises out of a subrogation dispute between Plaintiff Chrystele McKandes ("Mckandes"or "Plaintiff"), and Defendants Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association ("BCBS"), Group Hospitalization and Medical Services, Inc. ("GHMS") and CapitalCare, Inc. ("CapitalCare") (collectively referred to as "Defendants"). Pending before this Court is Plaintiff's Motion to Remand [23-1]. The Motion and Oppositions to the Motion have been fully briefed and are now ripe for review. The Court has reviewed the pleadings and the applicable law and has determined that no hearing is deemed necessary. See D. Md. R. 105(6). For the reasons stated below, the Court will GRANT Plaintiff's Motion and will remand the case to the Circuit Court for Prince George's County. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND On March 3, 1999, Plaintiff was involved in a automobile accident. In September, 1999, she received $20,000 from State Farm. Plaintiff alleges that BCBS asserted a lien on Plaintiff's

1

recovery, and that she paid BCBS $3,367.94 to resolve the lien. Plaintiff claims further that on September 17, 1999, she paid $187.37 to BCBS. Thereafter, Plaintiff filed a class action suit against Defendants in the Circuit Court for Prince George's County, alleging, inter alia, common law claims based on Defendants' alleged violation of the Maryland Health Maintenance Organization Act ("The Maryland HMO Act"). Plaintiff filed the Complaint on behalf of a class of all persons who (1) are or have been members or insureds of Blue Cross; (2) have received medical or health care treatment or services from Blue Cross; and (3) have been notified by Blue Cross that it had a lien against or a subrogation interest in any monies that the members or insureds had received or would receive from a third party.1 Defendants subsequently removed the case to this Court. II. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On May 22, 2001, this Court stayed this case pending resolution by the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit of Riemer v. Columbia Medical Plan. After the Court of appeals decided Riemer, the Court lifted the stay on January 15, 2003. III. ANALYSIS A. Maryland's Law of Subrogation After a class of plaintiffs in the Riemer challenged their insurer's subrogation rights under their contracts, the Defendants Columbia Medical Plan, removed the action to this Court, alleging that plaintiffs' claims were preempted by ERISA. See Riemer, supra. Judge Legg (now Chief Judge

1

Excluded from the class are (1) federal government employees who are insureds under federal employee health insurance contracts governed by the Federal Employees Health Benefits Act ("FEHBA"), 5 U.S.C.

Download Chrystele McKandes v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association.pdf

Maryland Law