Gonda v. Permanente Medical Group, Inc, 3:11-cv-01363

Background

Dr. Thomas A. Gonda, a former TPMG thoracic surgeon, suffered a 2003 head injury and later struggled with cognitive episodes and long‑standing substance abuse; he applied for long‑term disability (LTD) benefits under TPMG’s plan.
Gonda received LTD benefits from June 2007 to October 7, 2010; Life Insurance Company of North America (LINA) later denied continued benefits and denied two administrative appeals.
In November 2011 Gonda settled wrongful‑termination claims with TPMG/Kaiser by signing a comprehensive Settlement Agreement that released "any and all" claims against TPMG and related parties and expressly mentioned ERISA claims.
Gonda subsequently sued under ERISA and for breach of fiduciary duty; defendants moved for summary judgment arguing the Settlement Agreement barred his claims.
Gonda argued the release was invalid or inapplicable because defendants raised the defense late, their conduct (allowing administrative appeals) superseded or estopped enforcement, the parties didn’t intend to release LTD/ERISA claims, and summary judgment was premature.
The Court found the release clear, knowing, and voluntary (plaintiff had counsel and 21 days to consider), rejected the supersession/estoppel/timeliness arguments, and held the Settlement Agreement bars all claims against TPMG and the TPMG LTD Plan.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Settlement Agreement bars Gonda’s ERISA and related claims	The release did not cover his LTD/ERISA claims because defendants’ post‑settlement conduct (allowing administrative appeals, delaying assertion) and negotiation history show no intent to release those claims	The Settlement Agreement unambiguously released "any and all" claims including ERISA; defendants may assert the release as an affirmative defense	The release unambiguously waived ERISA claims; conduct/appeals did not supersede or estop enforcement; defense is available (summary judgment granted)
Whether Gonda’s waiver of ERISA rights was knowing and voluntary	Waiver lacked separate consideration and parties did not discuss LTD during settlement negotiations	Gonda had counsel, at least 21 days to consider, and the agreement explicitly referenced ERISA; consideration covered losses generally	Waiver was knowing and voluntary given counsel involvement, time to consider, and explicit, integrated release language
Whether extrinsic evidence or post‑settlement conduct can create ambiguity	Post‑settlement conduct (defendants’ delay, internal appeals) shows a different mutual intent and creates an ambiguity requiring discovery	The release is integrated and unambiguous; extrinsic evidence cannot contradict clear terms	Court considered extrinsic evidence but found no reasonable alternative meaning; discovery under Rule 56(d) denied because Gonda failed to show essential facts would likely exist
Whether the TPMG LTD Plan was encompassed by the release despite not being named	Plan is a separate entity and thus not released	The Plan is an instrumentality/arm of TPMG and falls within the broad release of TPMG, its agents, representatives, and related companies	The Plan was released; ERISA action against the Plan is barred

Key Cases Cited

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard)
Nissan Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Fritz Cos., 210 F.3d 1099 (9th Cir.) (moving party burdens on summary judgment)
Finz v. Schlesinger, 957 F.2d 78 (2d Cir. 1992) (six‑factor test for knowing and voluntary waiver of federal claims)
Morais v. Cent. Beverage Corp. Union Emps.' Supplemental Ret. Plan, 167 F.3d 709 (1st Cir. 1999) (scrutiny of ERISA waivers; totality of circumstances; federal common law guidance)
Evans v. Safeco Life Ins. Co., 916 F.2d 1437 (9th Cir. 1990) (federal common law governs interpretation of ERISA insurance policies and supports uniformity)
Botefur v. City of Eagle Point, 7 F.3d 152 (9th Cir. 1993) (settlement agreements generally interpreted under state contract law)