Ahmed v. CIGNA Health Management, Inc.

S.D. New York

Ahmed v. CIGNA Health Management, Inc.

DecidedJune 17, 2024

Docket1:23-cv-08094

StatusUnknown

This text of Ahmed v. CIGNA Health Management, Inc. (Ahmed v. CIGNA Health Management, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ahmed v. CIGNA Health Management, Inc., (S.D.N.Y. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK AZAM AHMED, Plaintiff, -against- 23-CV-8094 (AS)

CIGNA HEALTH MANAGEMENT, INC. et ORDER al., Defendants.

ARUN SUBRAMANIAN, United States District Judge: All parties agree that the Certificate of Coverage attached to the complaint is the authentic insurance contract between Ahmed and Wellfleet and contains a term limiting the time to sue. That term states the following: No action at law or in equity may be maintained against Us prior to the expiration of 60 days after written submission of a claim has been furnished to Us as required in this Certificate. You must start any lawsuit against Us under this Certificate within three (3) years from the date the claim was required to be filed.

The contract defines “Us” as: Atlanta International Insurance Company and anyone to whom We legally delegate performance, on Our behalf, under this Certificate.

The complaint alleges that Cigna was acting as “a subcontractor of the policy administrator.” Dkt. 43 at 1. By Thursday, June 20, 2024, at 5:00 PM, Plaintiff and Cigna should submit letters, not to exceed three single-spaced pages, discussing whether this contractual provision means that a three- year term also applies to Plaintiff’s unjust-enrichment claim against Cigna. In addition, the parties should address: e Whether the unjust-enrichment claim is subject to a three-year term because it is “based on the same allegations” as the breach-of-contract claim. Herba v. Chichester, 754 N.Y.S.2d 695, 697 (3d Dep’t 2003). e Whether Plaintiff can seek disgorgement on an unjust-enrichment claim. See, e.g., □□□□□ Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA v. Rudell & Assocs., Inc., 189 N.Y.S.3d 68, 70 (1st Dep’t 2023) (“Plaintiffs are not entitled to disgorgement of [defendants’] profits based on their unjust enrichment claim, as these damages would compensate plaintiffs beyond their losses.”).

SO ORDERED. Dated: June 17, 2024 New York, New York G4f ARUN SUBRAMANIAN United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK AZAM AHMED, Plaintiff, -against- 23-CV-8094 (AS)

CIGNA HEALTH MANAGEMENT, INC. et ORDER al., Defendants.

ARUN SUBRAMANIAN, United States District Judge: All parties agree that the Certificate of Coverage attached to the complaint is the authentic insurance contract between Ahmed and Wellfleet and contains a term limiting the time to sue. That term states the following: No action at law or in equity may be maintained against Us prior to the expiration of 60 days after written submission of a claim has been furnished to Us as required in this Certificate. You must start any lawsuit against Us under this Certificate within three (3) years from the date the claim was required to be filed.

The contract defines “Us” as: Atlanta International Insurance Company and anyone to whom We legally delegate performance, on Our behalf, under this Certificate.

The complaint alleges that Cigna was acting as “a subcontractor of the policy administrator.” Dkt. 43 at 1. By Thursday, June 20, 2024, at 5:00 PM, Plaintiff and Cigna should submit letters, not to exceed three single-spaced pages, discussing whether this contractual provision means that a three- year term also applies to Plaintiff’s unjust-enrichment claim against Cigna. In addition, the parties should address: e Whether the unjust-enrichment claim is subject to a three-year term because it is “based on the same allegations” as the breach-of-contract claim. Herba v. Chichester, 754 N.Y.S.2d 695, 697 (3d Dep’t 2003). e Whether Plaintiff can seek disgorgement on an unjust-enrichment claim. See, e.g., □□□□□ Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, PA v. Rudell & Assocs., Inc., 189 N.Y.S.3d 68, 70 (1st Dep’t 2023) (“Plaintiffs are not entitled to disgorgement of [defendants’] profits based on their unjust enrichment claim, as these damages would compensate plaintiffs beyond their losses.”).

SO ORDERED. Dated: June 17, 2024 New York, New York G4f ARUN SUBRAMANIAN United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Ahmed v. CIGNA Health Management, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ahmed-v-cigna-health-management-inc-nysd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack