Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

FILED
December 3, 1999 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk

AT NASHVILLE

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE SUMNER COUNTY EMPLOYEES' TRUST FUND ON BEHALF OF THE SUMNER COUNTY EMPLOYEES' TRUST, Plaintiff/Appellee, VS. RUBY GRAVES, Defendant/Appellant, and son, JERRY D. GRAVES, Defendant. )

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Sumner Circuit No. 14647-C Appeal No. M1997-00069-COA-R3-CV

APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR SUMNER COUNTY AT GALLATIN, TENNESSEE THE HONORABLE THOMAS GOODALL, JUDGE

For the Plaintiff/Appellee: William R. Wright

For the Defendant/Appellant: C. Tracey Parks

Page 1

Leah May Dennen Office of the Law Director Gallatin, Tennessee

Harsh, Parks & Harsh Gallatin, Tennessee

VACATED IN PART AND REMANDED

WILLIAM C. KOCH, JR., JUDGE

Page 2

OPINION
This appeal involves a dispute over the obligation of a member of a group health insurance plan to reimburse the plan for medical payments made on behalf of the member's dependent. The plan's administrator requested the member and her dependent to reimburse the plan for the medical payments after discovering that the dependent had received a financial settlement from the person who caused the dependent's injuries. When the member and the dependent refused to reimburse the payments, the plan filed suit in the Circuit Court for Sumner County against both parties. The trial court granted the plan's motion for summary judgment and ordered both the member and her dependent to reimburse the plan for medical payments. We have determined that the plan was not entitled to a judgment as a matter of law against the member and accordingly vacate the summary judgment against her. I. Ruby Graves works for the Sumner County Board of Education. County employees like Ms. Graves participate in a group health insurance plan established and maintained by the Sumner County Employees' Trust and administered by Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Tennessee. The plan permits its members to purchase individual coverage, family coverage, or coverage for themselves and one designated eligible dependent. 1 Ms. Graves elected to purchase coverage for herself and her son, Jerry Graves. Jerry Graves was seriously injured three months after his eighteenth birthday while riding as a passenger in an automobile owned and driven by Erik Vincent. Jerry Graves incurred $8,622.95 in medical expenses which were paid by the Trust. Sometime later, he received $18,000 for his injuries in a settlement with Mr. Vincent's insurance company. The settlement check was made out solely to Jerry Graves, and Ms. Graves received no part of the settlement proceeds. When Blue Cross/Blue Shield learned of the settlement, it requested Ms. Graves and her son to reimburse the Trust for the payments for medical expenses it had made on behalf of Jerry Graves. Despite the reimbursement provision in the health insurance policy, both

Page 3

Ms. Graves and her son declined to reimburse the Trust. Accordingly, in September 1995, the Trust filed suit against Ms. Graves and Jerry Graves in the Circuit Court for Sumner County seeking a judgment against them for $8,622.95 plus attorney's fees and costs. Ms. Graves filed an answer denying any obligation to reimburse the Trust. Jerry Graves did not file an answer and made no other response to the suit. The Trust later moved for a summary judgment against both Ms. Graves and her son. Ms. Graves opposed the motion on the ground that she had no legal obligation to reimburse the Trust for the medical payments made on her son's behalf. The trial court granted the summary judgment and entered an order directing Ms. Graves and Jerry Graves to pay the Trust $8,622.95 for the medical payments and $1,452 for its legal expenses. Ms. Graves has appealed. II. We begin with the well-settled standards governing appellate review of summary judgments. Summary judgments are proper in virtually any civil case that can be resolved on the basis of legal issues alone. See Byrd v. Hall, 847 S.W.2d 208, 210 (Tenn. 1993); Tomlinson v. Kelley, 969 S.W.2d 402, 405 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997). They are not, however, appropriate when genuine disputes regarding material facts exist. See Tenn. R. Civ. P. 56.04. Thus, a summary judgment should be granted only when the undisputed facts, and the inferences reasonably drawn from the undisputed facts, support one conclusion

Download Trustees.pdf

Tennessee Law