In 2008, Thomas' brother, the named beneficiary on both policies, submitted a claim for $104,000 from each contract, after his sister had died. The claim was denied later that year, on the grounds that Thomas had failed to provide proof of her disability upon leaving the company in 2004.

Countrywide employees had electronic access to their retirement and benefits summary plan descriptions, which would have detailed what Thomas needed to do to maintain her insurance policies upon leaving the company. Those SPDs were distributed through the company's intranet system — meaning access was available only to Countrywide's employees.

The Employee Retirement Income Security Act is specific about administrators' and sponsors' need to fully disclose and inform participants about what actions and scenarios could lead to a suspension of benefits. 

And the Department of Labor is specific about what sponsors must do if they are to distribute plan documents electronically. 

For one, employees must sign consent to receive the documents electronically.

At the heart of the case, Thomas vs. Cigna Group Insurance, is whether Countrywide, the plan sponsor, was compliant in fully disclosing plan details, which were disseminated on the company's intranet system. 

The case also raises the question of whether employees are actually provided with SPDs when they are made available via a company intranet system. Just because participants have access to SPDs, is that enough to fulfill the requirement of sponsors to provide the documents? 

To Cigna, the answer was obvious. At one point in a succession of queries between a Cigna claims specialists and an in-house lawyer for the insurance company, the attorney wrote in an email that, "I think we have an argument that she (Mrs. Thomas, the original beneficiary) was put on notice" when she was an employee and had access to SPDs through the company intranet. 

Cigna therefore believed it had a right to deny the claim, because all of the plan material was available to Thomas via the company intranet, and she should have therefore known she was required to provide proof of her disability to remain eligible for benefits under the life insurance plans. 

Judge Sandra Townes disagreed. In her recent ruling, she wrote that she found no evidence that Cigna or Countrywide ever provided Thomas with an SPD, or evidence that she was even informed that the SPDs were available on the company intranet. 

It's likely not the last action in the case, as now Cigna and Bank of America will likely litigate over who is responsible to pay the claim — the underwriter or the plan sponsor.