Florida Statute 1002.1 - Full Text and Legal Analysis

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XLVIII
EARLY LEARNING-20 EDUCATION CODE

Chapter 1002
STUDENT AND PARENTAL RIGHTS AND EDUCATIONAL CHOICES

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 1002.01

1002.01 Definitions.—

(1) A “home education program” means the sequentially progressive instruction of a student directed by his or her parent to satisfy the attendance requirements of ss. 1002.41, 1003.01(16), and 1003.21(1).

(2) A “personalized education program” means the sequentially progressive instruction of a student directed by his or her parent to satisfy the attendance requirements of ss. 1003.01(16) and 1003.21(1) while registered with an eligible nonprofit scholarship-funding organization pursuant to s. 1002.395. A personalized education student shall be provided the same flexibility and opportunities as provided in s. 1002.41(3)-(12).

(3) A “private school” is a nonpublic school defined as an individual, association, copartnership, or corporation, or department, division, or section of such organizations, that designates itself as an educational center that includes kindergarten or a higher grade or as an elementary, secondary, business, technical, or trade school below college level or any organization that provides instructional services that meet the intent of s. 1003.01(16) or that gives preemployment or supplementary training in technology or in fields of trade or industry or that offers academic, literary, or career training below college level, or any combination of the above, including an institution that performs the functions of the above schools through correspondence or extension, except those licensed under the provisions of chapter 1005. A private school may be a parochial, religious, denominational, for-profit, or nonprofit school. This definition does not include home education programs conducted in accordance with s. 1002.41.

History.—s. 90, ch. 2002-387; s. 32, ch. 2004-41; s. 76, ch. 2004-357; s. 169, ch. 2007-5; s. 139, ch. 2023-8; s. 4, ch. 2023-16; s. 71, ch. 2024-2.

F.S. 1002.01 on Google Scholar

F.S. 1002.01 on CourtListener

Amendments to 1002.01

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 1002.01

Total Results: 105

Donovan v. Dillingham

688 F.2d 1367, 3 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2122, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 24826

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 15, 1982 | Docket: 623495

Cited 460 times | Published

II. 5 ERISA § 3(1), 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), defines "employee welfare benefit plan" or "welfare

Hca Health Services of Georgia, Inc. v. Employers Health Insurance Company

240 F.3d 982, 2001 WL 91380

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 14, 2001 | Docket: 1336030

Cited 160 times | Published

welfare benefit plan within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) was established. In its contract with EHI, Software

Blue Cross & Blue Shield v. Sanders

138 F.3d 1347, 1998 U.S. App. LEXIS 7367

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 13, 1998 | Docket: 74598

Cited 143 times | Published

“employee welfare benefit fund” under 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), was self-funded by NRC, which paid the cost

Vann K. Howard and Kathryn D. Howard v. Parisian, Inc., Etc. Parisian Employees Health Care Plan Hahn Shoe Company Protective Life Insurance Company

807 F.2d 1560, 8 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1033, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 1161, 55 U.S.L.W. 2407

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jan 20, 1987 | Docket: 972766

Cited 139 times | Published

accident, disability, [or] death____ 29 U.S.C.A. § 1002(1). Established by Parisian in order to provide

Connecticut State Dental Ass'n v. Anthem Health Plans, Inc.

591 F.3d 1337, 48 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1674, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 28773, 2009 WL 5126236

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Dec 30, 2009 | Docket: 399501

Cited 131 times | Published

benefit plans" governed by ERISA. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). Rutt and Egan participate in Anthem's network

James T. Williams v. Fred P. Wright, Jr., Individually and as Liquidating Trustee of Wright Pest Control Co. Of South Carolina, Inc.

927 F.2d 1540, 13 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2137, 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 5883, 59 U.S.L.W. 2664

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 11, 1991 | Docket: 829912

Cited 124 times | Published

Wright, Jr., President 4 . 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) provides: The terms "employee welfare

Butero v. Royal MacCabees Life Insurance

174 F.3d 1207, 28 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1379, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 8770

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: May 10, 1999 | Docket: 395319

Cited 116 times | Published

benefits through an insurance policy. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1); see also Donovan v. Dillingham, 688

Butero v. Royal Maccabees Life Ins.

174 F.3d 1207, 1999 WL 288123

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: May 10, 1999 | Docket: 395317

Cited 108 times | Published

benefits through an insurance policy. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1); see also Donovan v. Dillingham, 688 F.2d 1367

Donovan v. Dillingham

688 F.2d 1367, 3 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2122

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 15, 1982 | Docket: 66192346

Cited 90 times | Published

benefit plans exist. II. ERISA § 3(1), 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), defines “employee welfare benefit plan” or “welfare

Lordmann Enterprises, Inc. v. Equicor, Inc.

32 F.3d 1529, 18 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2554, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 26829, 1994 WL 486753

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 26, 1994 | Docket: 1036261

Cited 89 times | Published

is covered by ERISA. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) (1988); Donovan v. Dillingham, 688

Margery A. Morstein v. National Insurance Services, Inc. Pan American Life Insurance Company the Shaw Agency Scott Hankins

93 F.3d 715, 20 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1729, 1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 20848, 1996 WL 468471

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 19, 1996 | Docket: 566783

Cited 79 times | Published

death or unemployment.... Id. at § 1002(1). 6 . Senator Javits commented:

Marlowe Blake and Pam Blake v. Unionmutual Stock Life Ins. Co. Of America

906 F.2d 1525, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 12545, 1990 WL 92677

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 30, 1990 | Docket: 508757

Cited 61 times | Published

Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). See Pilot Life v. Dedeaux, 481 U

Barbara J. Kemp v. International Business Machines Corporation

109 F.3d 708, 20 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2814, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 6505

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 8, 1997 | Docket: 761445

Cited 53 times | Published

services.... 27 29 U.S.C.A. § 1002(1) (West Supp.1996) (emphasis added). In other

Barbara J. Kemp v. International Business Machines Corporation

109 F.3d 708, 20 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2814, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 6505

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 8, 1997 | Docket: 761445

Cited 53 times | Published

services.... 27 29 U.S.C.A. § 1002(1) (West Supp.1996) (emphasis added). In other

Local Union 2134, United Mine Workers of America, Etc., Plaintiff v. Powhatan Fuel, Inc., Etc., Leroy Osborne, Jr.

828 F.2d 710, 56 U.S.L.W. 2279, 8 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2641, 1987 U.S. App. LEXIS 12747

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 28, 1987 | Docket: 811788

Cited 53 times | Published

employee welfare benefit plan under ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) which provides: The terms ‘employee welfare

Crawford B. Smith, Jr., and Jeannie Smith v. Jefferson Pilot Life Insurance Company

14 F.3d 562, 17 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2433, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 2199, 1994 WL 28531

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 2, 1994 | Docket: 1113055

Cited 49 times | Published

event of sickness, [or] accident....” 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1)(A). Both case law and Department of Labor

Richard Owens, Aaron Durall Beavers, of the Estate of Richard Owens, Deceased v. Storehouse, Inc., and Klais and Company, Inc.

984 F.2d 394, 16 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1737, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 3066, 61 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 42,079, 1993 WL 30299

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 25, 1993 | Docket: 1015902

Cited 49 times | Published

benefit plan within the meaning of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) (“the Plan”). 2 The Plan provided

Harley Amos and Gail Amos v. Blue Cross-Blue Shield of Alabama and Jan Cullinghan

868 F.2d 430

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: May 5, 1989 | Docket: 633249

Cited 49 times | Published

sickness, accident, disability or death. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1); Pilot Life Ins. Co. v. Dedeaux, 481

Heffner v. Blue Cross And Blue Shield Of Alabama

443 F.3d 1330

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 24, 2006 | Docket: 735610

Cited 46 times | Published

benefit plan" governed by ERISA, see 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1)(A), as well as a "group health plan," see id

United Mine Works of Am. Combined Benefit Fund v. Andre M. Toffel, for Walter Energy, Inc. (In re Walter Energy, Inc.)

911 F.3d 1121

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Dec 27, 2018 | Docket: 65663243

Cited 45 times | Published

surgical, or hospital care or benefits...." 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), (3). The Funds argue that our prior ERISA decisions

Ross Glenn Moorman, Jr. v. UnumProvident

464 F.3d 1260, 38 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2537, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 23691, 2006 WL 2660931

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 18, 2006 | Docket: 659349

Cited 45 times | Published

benefits through an insurance policy. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1); see Donovan v. Dillingham, 688 F

James W. Hoover v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, an Alabama Corporation, Usx Corporation, a Delaware Corp.

855 F.2d 1538, 12 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 197, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 13552, 1988 WL 93979

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 30, 1988 | Docket: 867211

Cited 37 times | Published

death or unemployment ... benefits...." 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1)(A). 3 . An exception to this rule

Linda Randol and Bruce Randol, Jr. v. Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of Tennessee

987 F.2d 1547, 16 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2037, 1993 U.S. App. LEXIS 7508, 1993 WL 85729

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 12, 1993 | Docket: 842451

Cited 33 times | Published

Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). We hold that it does. Plaintiffs-appellants

Robert Stern v. International Business Machines (IBM), a New York Corporation

326 F.3d 1367, 30 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1520, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 7070, 2003 WL 1870321

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 14, 2003 | Docket: 1012832

Cited 29 times | Published

sickness, accident, [or] disability.” 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). ERISA also broadly preempts state laws relating

Turner v. Delta Family-Care Disability & Survivorship Plan

291 F.3d 1270, 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 9790, 2002 WL 1040194

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 9, 2002 | Docket: 2038728

Cited 29 times | Published

employee welfare benefit plan as defined in 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). It provides short and long term disability benefits

Donya Leigh Anderson v Unum Provident Corp.

369 F.3d 1257, 21 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 669, 32 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2318, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 9360, 2004 WL 1067788

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: May 13, 2004 | Docket: 398047

Cited 27 times | Published

in the event of ... disability. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) (emphasis added). “By definition, then, a welfare

Herbert A. SLAMEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. PAUL REVERE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, Defendant-Appellee

166 F.3d 1102, 22 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2688, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 1358, 1999 WL 43228

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 1, 1999 | Docket: 1070606

Cited 26 times | Published

accident, [or] disability. ... 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). In Donovan v. Dillingham, 688 F.2d

Linda Swerhun v. The Guardian Life Ins. Co. Of America

979 F.2d 195, 1992 U.S. App. LEXIS 32491, 1992 WL 348169

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Dec 15, 1992 | Docket: 840004

Cited 26 times | Published

disability, death or unemployment.... 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). 4 . The Supreme Court has demonstrated

Alday v. Container Corp. of America

906 F.2d 660, 1990 WL 91638

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 24, 1990 | Docket: 66255407

Cited 15 times | Published

plan is a welfare benefit plan under 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) and not a pension plan under 29 U.S.C. § 1002(2)

Gregory L. Tippitt v. Reliance Standard Life Ins.

457 F.3d 1227, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 19174, 2006 WL 2105986

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 31, 2006 | Docket: 1390225

Cited 13 times | Published

welfare benefit plan,” see 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), as well as a “group health plan,” see

Stvartak v. Eastman Kodak Co.

945 F. Supp. 1532, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17552, 1996 WL 670640

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Nov 15, 1996 | Docket: 1618293

Cited 13 times | Published

Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA"). See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), (3), (5), (7), (8); Defendant's Exhibits ["DX"]

Donovan v. Dillingham

668 F.2d 1196, 3 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1073, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 21622

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 22, 1982 | Docket: 244422

Cited 13 times | Published

carrier, asserting jurisdiction under 29 U.S.C.A. § 1002(1) (West 1975). The district court held that SMET

Savona v. Prudential Ins. Co. of America

648 So. 2d 705, 20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 9, 1995 Fla. LEXIS 4, 1995 WL 2421

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 5, 1995 | Docket: 1343124

Cited 12 times | Published

employee benefit plan as defined in 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) and, therefore, should be regulated by ERISA

United Benefit Life Insurance Company v. United States Life Insurance Company, Sally Y. King

36 F.3d 1063, 1994 WL 556079

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Dec 9, 1994 | Docket: 1037646

Cited 12 times | Published

Security Act of 1974 as amended (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). Both policies, standing alone, provide

Dearmas v. Av-Med, Inc.

814 F. Supp. 1103, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6187, 1993 WL 51541

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 11, 1993 | Docket: 1707508

Cited 12 times | Published

sickness, accident, disability,.... 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1)(A). In contrast, an employee pension plan provides

In Re Managed Care Litigation

135 F. Supp. 2d 1253, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7776, 2001 WL 220108

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 2, 2001 | Docket: 2370418

Cited 11 times | Published

through the purchase of *1268 insurance. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). The preemption section states that this federal

Sawinski v. Bill Currie Ford, Inc.

866 F. Supp. 1383, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15436, 1994 WL 594512

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 26, 1994 | Docket: 809524

Cited 10 times | Published

1370 (11th Cir.1982). ERISA § 3(1), 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), defines an "employee welfare benefit plan" as:

Sawinski v. Bill Currie Ford, Inc.

881 F. Supp. 1571, 4 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 462, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4993, 1995 WL 224811

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 13, 1995 | Docket: 1784654

Cited 9 times | Published

disability, death or unemployment...." 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). Bill Currie Ford has not alleged that it did

In Re Pruner

140 B.R. 1, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6345, 1992 WL 96706

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 18, 1992 | Docket: 1637841

Cited 9 times | Published

distributing benefits from the plan. [3] 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1).

Irene Jones v. LMR International

457 F.3d 1174, 38 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1829, 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 19161, 2006 WL 2097075

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jul 31, 2006 | Docket: 1390224

Cited 7 times | Published

or maintained by an employer.” 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) (emphasis added). Because a covered plan is defined

Riggs v. Smith

953 F. Supp. 389, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 695, 1997 WL 26760

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jan 22, 1997 | Docket: 1342281

Cited 7 times | Published

benefits, including medical insurance. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). The Eleventh Circuit has analyzed the statutory

Thomas Ex Rel. Estate of Robinson v. Burlington Industries, Inc.

763 F. Supp. 1570, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7026, 1991 WL 87214

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: May 24, 1991 | Docket: 1154218

Cited 7 times | Published

and "welfare plan," in turn, are defined in Section 1002(1) as: [A]ny plan, fund, or program which was

Comprehensive Care Corp. v. Doughtry

682 F. Supp. 516, 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2530, 1988 WL 26152

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 24, 1988 | Docket: 1150746

Cited 7 times | Published

Congress defined an employee welfare-benefit plan in § 1002(1) as one which provides to employees "medical,

Oliver v. Coca Cola Co.

497 F.3d 1181, 41 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1856, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 20628

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 29, 2007 | Docket: 65658483

Cited 6 times | Published

plan within the meaning of ERISA. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). The Plan document designates Coca-Cola as the

Blue Cross v. Sanders

138 F.3d 1347

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 13, 1998 | Docket: 1118740

Cited 6 times | Published

“employee welfare benefit fund” under 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), was self-funded by NRC, which paid the cost

In re Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases—Report No. 2012-09

122 So. 3d 263, 38 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 617, 2013 Fla. LEXIS 1893, 2013 WL 4734579

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 4, 2013 | Docket: 60234660

Cited 5 times | Published

age. Definitions. Give as applicable. Fla. Stat. 1002.01. “Private School” means a nonpublic school

Edwards v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

213 F. Supp. 2d 1376, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13152, 2002 WL 1802578

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 16, 2002 | Docket: 2449776

Cited 5 times | Published

in section 186(c) of this title. ... 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). In the seminal case of Donovan v. Dillingham

Henry v. Robey-Barber Insurance Services Corp.

777 F. Supp. 1554, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17362, 1991 WL 253132

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 17, 1991 | Docket: 2113182

Cited 5 times | Published

or unemployment.... (Emphasis added). 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). There are ample factual allegations in the complaint

Westover v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

771 F. Supp. 1172, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18649, 1991 WL 183564

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 10, 1991 | Docket: 1245216

Cited 5 times | Published

welfare plan" as that term is defined in 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). As such, this case is controlled in its entirety

Parra v. John Alden Life Insurance

22 F. Supp. 2d 1360, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12875, 1998 WL 484387

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 1, 1998 | Docket: 2292538

Cited 4 times | Published

did qualify as an ERISA plan. Cf. 29 U.S.C.A. § 1002(1) (describing ERISA plans). [2] ERISA also preempts

Harrison v. Aetna Life Insurance

925 F. Supp. 744, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6882, 1996 WL 199825

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 1996 | Docket: 2139004

Cited 4 times | Published

Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA"). See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), (3), (5), (7), (8); Pretrial Stipulation ["PTS"]

Urbino v. Pan American Life Insurance

822 F. Supp. 1556, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7900, 1993 WL 191571

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 30, 1993 | Docket: 1830635

Cited 4 times | Published

provided through the purchase of insurance. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). Moreover, it is a common practice for employers

Silverman v. Barbizon School of Modeling & Fashion, Inc.

720 F. Supp. 966, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10190, 1989 WL 99546

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 24, 1989 | Docket: 1708691

Cited 4 times | Published

extraordinarily broad scope of this statute is seen in § 1002(1) which provides: The terms "employee welfare benefit

Donovan v. Dillingham

668 F.2d 1196, 3 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1073

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 22, 1982 | Docket: 66191326

Cited 4 times | Published

carrier, asserting jurisdiction under 29 U.S.C.A. § 1002(1) (West 1975). The district court held that SMET

Stern v. Provident Life and Accident Ins. Co.

295 F. Supp. 2d 1321, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23183, 2003 WL 22967253

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Dec 18, 2003 | Docket: 2155013

Cited 3 times | Published

employee welfare benefit plan under 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) if it is a: (1) a'plan, fund or program' (2)

Chiroff v. Life Insurance Co. of North America

142 F. Supp. 2d 1360, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21008

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Nov 16, 2000 | Docket: 2175973

Cited 3 times | Published

the administration of such plan. [4] 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) defines an ERISA-covered plan as follows: any

Belasco v. W.K.P. Wilson & Sons, Inc.

833 F.2d 277, 56 U.S.L.W. 2343

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Dec 2, 1987 | Docket: 66230546

Cited 3 times | Published

disability, death or unemployment.... 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). . ERISA section 502(a)(1)(B), set forth in

BLUE CROSS & BLUE SHIELD v. Matthews

473 So. 2d 831, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1912, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 15204

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 9, 1985 | Docket: 451496

Cited 3 times | Published

their financial soundness. [7] Under 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), an employee welfare benefit plan is one which

Flynn v. Estevez

221 So. 3d 1241, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 9295, 2017 WL 2781591

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 27, 2017 | Docket: 60267572

Cited 2 times | Published

denominational, for-profit, or nonprofit school.” § 1002.01(2), Fla. Stat. (2007). . Section 1002.42(6)(a)

Clark v. Unum Life Insurance Co. of America

95 F. Supp. 3d 1335, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38498, 2015 WL 1403936

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 26, 2015 | Docket: 64301257

Cited 2 times | Published

participants or their beneficiaries. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1); Donovan v. Dillingham, 688 F.2d 1367, 1371 (11th

Oliver v. Coca-Cola Co.

546 F.3d 1353

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 29, 2007 | Docket: 2032410

Cited 2 times | Published

plan within the meaning of ERISA. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). The Plan document designates Coca-Cola as the

Vardag v. Motorola, Inc.

264 F. Supp. 2d 1056, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9724, 2003 WL 21221892

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: May 8, 2003 | Docket: 2374638

Cited 2 times | Published

it relates to medical benefits. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1); Donovan v. Dillingham, 688 F.2d 1367, 1371 (11th

Letner v. UNUM Life Insurance Co. of America

203 F. Supp. 2d 1291, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24637, 2001 WL 1867976

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 3, 2001 | Docket: 2375074

Cited 2 times | Published

disability, death, or unemployment. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). This statutory framework has proven to be elusive

Cacciatore v. Liberty Life Assurance Co. of Boston

85 F. Supp. 2d 1282, 24 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2661, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1162, 2000 WL 141221

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 8, 2000 | Docket: 2368019

Cited 2 times | Published

disability, death or unemployment.... 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). In Donovan v. Dillingham, 688 F.2d 1367 (11th

E.I.C. Elkins Constructors, Inc. v. Chiles

872 F. Supp. 931, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18911, 1994 WL 727955

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 1, 1994 | Docket: 1659974

Cited 2 times | Published

disability, death or unemployment." 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). With limited exceptions not pertinent here,

Tumulty v. Aetna Life Insurance

659 F. Supp. 70, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8481

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 3, 1987 | Docket: 1782209

Cited 2 times | Published

benefits in the event of sickness.... 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). See Howard v. Parisian, Inc., 807 F.2d 1560

Ward v. RETIREMENT BD. OF NFL PLAYER RETIRE. PLAN

643 F.3d 1331

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jun 22, 2011 | Docket: 1889212

Cited 1 times | Published

in an ERISA welfare benefit plan. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) ("The terms `employee welfare benefit plan' and

Belknap v. Hartford Life and Accident Ins. Co.

389 F. Supp. 2d 1320, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22142, 2005 WL 2462071

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 9, 2005 | Docket: 2365738

Cited 1 times | Published

disability, death, or unemployment. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). The Eleventh Circuit has stated that to be an

Harman Ex Rel. Seybold v. UNITED HEALTH. OF FLA.

207 F. Supp. 2d 1355

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: May 8, 2002 | Docket: 2175053

Cited 1 times | Published

employee welfare benefit plans. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). The five elements of an employee welfare benefit

Thomas v. Healthplan Services, Inc.

74 F. Supp. 2d 1196, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17730, 1999 WL 1051306

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 8, 1999 | Docket: 2296685

Cited 1 times | Published

disability, death or unemployment ... 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). In Donovan v. Dillingham, 688 F.2d 1367 (11th

Albright v. Union Bankers Insurance

85 F. Supp. 2d 1302, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21324

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 19, 1999 | Docket: 2367915

Cited 1 times | Published

disability, death or unemployment.... 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). The Eleventh Circuit has held that "a plan,

Reed v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

4 F. Supp. 2d 1148, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5210, 1998 WL 181826

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 13, 1998 | Docket: 2179132

Cited 1 times | Published

"employee welfare benefit plan" under 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). An ERISA-qualified "employee welfare benefit

Morstein v. National Insurance Svs.

74 F.3d 1135

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 12, 1996 | Docket: 235731

Cited 1 times | Published

death or unemployment,.... Id. at § 1002(1). 6 Senator Javits made the following

Morstein v. National Insurance Svs.

74 F.3d 1135

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 12, 1996 | Docket: 235728

Cited 1 times | Published

of preemption policy was necessary.6 Id. at § 1002(1). 6 Senator Javits made the following

Jacobs v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Iowa

835 F. Supp. 1378, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15224, 1993 WL 441387

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 14, 1993 | Docket: 1812368

Cited 1 times | Published

an employee welfare-benefit plan in 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) as one which provides to employees "`medical

American Association of Christian Schools Voluntary Employees Beneficiary Ass'n Welfare Plan Trust v. United States

850 F.2d 1510

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 2, 1988 | Docket: 66236372

Cited 1 times | Published

Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C.A. § 1002(1). An employee welfare benefit plan which “is subject

Carol H. Stewart v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 10, 2022 | Docket: 64881507

Published

benefits in the event of sickness.” 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) & (3) (emphasis added). On a de novo

Parker v. Shelmar Prop. Owner's Ass'n, Inc.

274 So. 3d 1219

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 21, 2019 | Docket: 64718957

Published

arguing that Appellee "violated Chapter 10, Section 1002.1 of the Florida Building Code, by placing the

Parker v. Shelmar Prop. Owner's Ass'n, Inc.

274 So. 3d 1219

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 21, 2019 | Docket: 64718956

Published

arguing that Appellee "violated Chapter 10, Section 1002.1 of the Florida Building Code, by placing the

United Mine Workers of America of Combined Benefit Fund v. Andre M. Toffel

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Dec 27, 2018 | Docket: 8455211

Published

or hospital care or benefits . . . .” 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), (3). The Funds argue that our prior ERISA

Collins v. Fluid Routing Solutions, LLC

371 F. Supp. 3d 1076

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 23, 2018 | Docket: 64323720

Published

ERISA employee welfare benefit plan. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) ; Donovan v. Dillingham , 688 F.2d 1367, 1371

Snyder v. Federal-Mogul Corp.

996 F. Supp. 2d 1253, 2014 WL 495372, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14909

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 6, 2014 | Docket: 65997359

Published

welfare benefit plans as defined by 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), and are not pension plans under 29 U.S.C. §

Ward v. Retirement Board of Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan

643 F.3d 1331

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jun 22, 2011 | Docket: 2906301

Published

welfare benefit plan. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1) ("The terms 'employee welfare benefit plan’ and

Stanley v. Life Ins. Co. of North America

426 F. Supp. 2d 1275, 38 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1787, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14834

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 31, 2006 | Docket: 143451

Published

funds, or prepaid legal services. . . . 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). The Eleventh Circuit has stated that an employee

Heffner v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Alabama, Inc.

443 F.3d 1330, 2006 WL 784782

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Mar 29, 2006 | Docket: 398533

Published

plan” governed by ERISA, see 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1)(A), as well as a “group health plan,” see

Rasmussen v. Time Insurance Co.

884 So. 2d 354, 34 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1048, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 13446, 2004 WL 2008467

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 10, 2004 | Docket: 64833485

Published

2d 1367, 1370 (11th Cir. 1982). Under 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), an employee welfare benefit plan is defined

Harman v. United Healthcare of Florida, Inc.

207 F. Supp. 2d 1355, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11860, 2002 WL 1285156

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: May 8, 2002 | Docket: 65970784

Published

employee welfare benefit plans. See 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). The five elements of an employee welfare benefit

HCA Health Services of Georgia, Inc. v. Employers

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 2, 2001 | Docket: 212585

Published

benefits to participants and beneficiaries. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). Because the group health insurance policy issued

HCA Health Services of Georgia, Inc. v. Employers

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 2, 2001 | Docket: 212594

Published

benefits to participants and beneficiaries. 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). Because the group health insurance policy issued

James F. Adams v. Thiokol Corporation

231 F.3d 837, 2000 WL 1587660

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 25, 2000 | Docket: 396151

Published

plan as defined under § 3(1) of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). 4 The Plan originated in 1992 and

James F. Adams v. Thiokol Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 25, 2000 | Docket: 396134

Published

3 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1).4 The Plan originated in 1992 and provided for

South Florida Blood Bank, Inc. v. Futch

764 So. 2d 724, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 8033

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 28, 2000 | Docket: 64799417

Published

surgical, or hospital care or benefits.” 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1, 3). Plaintiffs in ERISA actions must exhaust

Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Williams

82 F. Supp. 2d 1346, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21466, 1999 WL 1411909

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 1999 | Docket: 2386376

Published

Cir.1994). See Crysler, 66 F.3d at 948. [5] Section 1002(1) states: The terms "employee welfare benefit

Slamen v. Paul Revere Life Ins.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 1, 1999 | Docket: 395151

Published

accident, [or] disability.... 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). In Donovan v. Dillingham, 688 F.2d 1367 (11th

Slamen v. Paul Revere Life Ins.

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 1, 1999 | Docket: 2037150

Published

accident, [or] disability . . . . 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). In Donovan v. Dillingham, 688 F.2d 1367 (11th

Kemp v. International Business MacHines Corp.

109 F.3d 708, 1997 WL 131323

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 8, 1997 | Docket: 420768

Published

or prepaid legal services____ 29 U.S.C.A. § 1002(1) (West Supp.1996) (emphasis added). In other words

Tevini v. CHC International, Inc.

946 F. Supp. 985, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17625, 1996 WL 592652

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 30, 1996 | Docket: 66008904

Published

Plan”, as defined in § 3(1) of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), which has paid severance compensation to several

Fioretti v. Massachusetts General Life Insurance

53 F.3d 1228

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jun 7, 1995 | Docket: 64020787

Published

” and hence subject to ERISA, see 29 U.S.C.A. § 1002(1) (West 1985), the ERISA "savings clause” expressly

Tatum v. Bokofsky

842 F. Supp. 521, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 561, 1994 WL 22553

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jan 10, 1994 | Docket: 1025349

Published

constitutes an ERISA "plan." Under Title 29 U.S.C. Section 1002(1), ERISA defines an employee welfare benefit

AT & T Sickness & Accident Disability Benefit Plan v. Bricker

151 F.R.D. 433, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18509, 1993 WL 409863

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 23, 1993 | Docket: 66310235

Published

employee welfare benefit plan as defined in 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1), and is subject to the reporting, disclosure

Sussman v. Salem, Saxon & Nielsen, P.A.

818 F. Supp. 1510, 26 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1054, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4994, 65 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 43,361, 1993 WL 118154

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 13, 1993 | Docket: 65983647

Published

the meaning of Section 3(1) of ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1).” (Complaint, P. 2.) Additionally, the June 21

Northwestern National Life Insurance Co. v. Rutta

599 So. 2d 684, 15 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 1985, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 5205, 1992 WL 91417

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 6, 1992 | Docket: 64667721

Published

Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. Section 1002(1) and that appellee had established that she

Trustees of Mease Hospital, Inc. v. Velardocchia

777 F. Supp. 1569, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17357, 1991 WL 253124

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Nov 13, 1991 | Docket: 65975999

Published

provide such pensions). Section 3(1), 29 U.S.C. Section 1002(1). In addition, the Court has applied the pre-emption

O'Reilly v. Ceuleers

912 F.2d 1383, 1990 WL 129265

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 26, 1990 | Docket: 66257860

Published

found in the definition provided by 29 U.S.C.A. § 1002(1): (1) The terms “employee welfare benefit plan”

Decenzo/Reisman/Kellog, M.D., P.A. v. Cespedes

711 F. Supp. 612, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4162, 1989 WL 40116

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 4, 1989 | Docket: 66178815

Published

Dismiss should be granted. . 29 U.S.C.A. Section 1002(1) defines an employee welfare benefit plan as