Stroud v. Coca-Cola Consolidated, Inc., 2026 WL 2243978
A former employee sued her employer, asserting (among other claims) that the employer failed to send her a COBRA election notice following her termination. The employee alleged that she did not receive the notice in the mail and, therefore, was unaware of her right to elect continuation coverage. The employer responded that it had generated and mailed the required notice to the employee’s address of record in accordance with its standard procedures. Additionally, the employer produced copies of a “COBRA Enrollment Notice” and a “COBRA Information Notice,” both dated and addressed to the employee. Business records documented the date on which the notice was generated and included a notation that it had been “delivered.”
Stroud v. Coca-Cola Consolidated, Inc., 2026 WL 2243978 (W.D.N.C. 2026)
Available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-ncwd-3_25-cv-00733/pdf/USCOURTS-ncwd-3_25-cv-00733-1.pdf
The court ruled for the employer without a trial. Courts generally hold that a good faith attempt to comply with a reasonable interpretation of COBRA’s notice requirements is sufficient, and that proof of receipt is not required. Rather, sending a notice via first-class mail to the beneficiary’s last-known address will suffice.
The employee argued that the employer should first be required to demonstrate a reliable, established mailing process before any presumption of mailing could arise, and that the “delivered” notation in the business records might refer only to the completion of a third-party vendor’s printing or assembly process, not actual delivery to her mailbox.
The court rejected both arguments, finding that the employee offered no evidence suggesting that the employer’s customary mailing procedures were not followed or that the notices were not, in fact, mailed to her last-known address. Accordingly, the court concluded that the employer had made a good faith attempt to comply with COBRA’s notice requirements, supported by contemporaneous business records reflecting its standard mailing procedures.
EBIA Comment: This case illustrates how the strength of an employer’s business records and their specificity to an individual qualified beneficiary can be decisive in COBRA notice litigation. Courts have held that general testimony about mailing practices may not be enough. In one such case, a court concluded that an employer’s declaration regarding general business practices was insufficient to demonstrate compliance with its notice obligations, specifically because the employer could not produce a copy of the letter or any documentation to back up its assertion that the notice had been mailed. It is important for employers to retain contemporaneous, individualized records sufficient to prove that adequate notice has been timely provided to each qualified beneficiary.
For more information, see EBIA’s COBRA manual at Section XVIII.J (“Sending the Election Notice and Proving It Was Sent”).
Contributing Editors: EBIA Staff.
