Julie S. Selesnick
Top rated Employee Benefits attorney in Washington, Washington DC
Health Plan Legal Counsel PLLC
Practice areas: Employee Benefits, Health Care, Insurance Coverage; view more
Licensed in Washington DC since: 2004
Education: The George Washington University Law School
Selected to Super Lawyers: 2019 - 2026 Call today:
771-253-8597
Free Consultation Health Plan Legal Counsel PLLC
2300 N St NWSuite 300
Washington, DC 20037 Visit website
Details
Julie S. Selesnick, the founder and principal attorney of Health Plan Legal Counsel PLLC, based in Washington, D.C., where she provides strategic legal counsel to employers, plan sponsors, plan fiduciaries and health plan vendors. Concentrating her practice in labor and employment law, employee benefits, health care, insurance coverage, and business and corporate law, she offers on-demand, fractional legal services tailored to organizations that need sophisticated ERISA and health plan guidance without the expense of maintaining a full-time in-house attorney.
Ms. Selesnick's practice focuses on helping clients navigate the complex regulatory landscape governing self-funded health plans while advancing their business objectives and maintaining compliance with applicable laws.
An accomplished litigator, Ms. Selesnick has extensive courtroom experience leading both jury and bench trials as first-chair counsel. Throughout her career, she has successfully represented clients in high-stakes disputes, helping secure more than $91 million in settlements and verdicts. She is recognized for her practical legal counsel, strategic advocacy and ability to resolve complex legal matters efficiently while protecting her clients' operational and financial interests.
Ms. Selesnick earned her Juris Doctor from The George Washington University Law School in 2001, graduating as a member of the Order of the Coif in recognition of her academic excellence. She also holds a Bachelor of Arts from San Diego State University.
Admitted to practice law in Massachusetts since 2002 and the District of Columbia since 2004, Ms. Selesnick is also admitted before the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit.
Drawing on decades of legal experience, Ms. Selesnick provides clients with practical, responsive counsel designed to address the evolving challenges of employee benefits and health plan administration while supporting long-term organizational success.
Practice areas
Employee Benefits, Health Care, Insurance Coverage, Business/Corporate, Class Action/Mass Torts: PlaintiffFocus areas
Bad Faith Insurance, Class Actions, Contracts, Health & Health Care Law, Hospital Law, Insurance
- 40% Employee Benefits
- 20% Health Care
- 20% Insurance Coverage
- 10% Business/Corporate
- 10% Class Action/Mass Torts: Plaintiff
First Admitted: 2002, Massachusetts
Professional Webpage: https://healthplanlegalcounsel.com/about-us/julie-selesnick/
Bar / Professional Activity
- Massachusetts, 2002
- District of Columbia, 2004
- U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, 2005
- U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, 2008
- U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, 2019
Verdicts / Settlements (Case Results)
- In re American National Red Cross ERISA Litigation, 1:21-cv-00541 (D.D.C.) Class action litigation alleging excessive fees and mismanagement of 401(k) plan. Settled March 2025., 2025
- Luense et al v. Konica Minolta Business Solutions USA, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-06827 (D.N.J.) Secured Class Certification in 401(K) class action lawsuit alleging excessive fees and mismanagement of 401(k) plan.; settled Oct. 1, 2024, 2024
- Johnson v. RentGrow, Inc., 1:24-cv-10010 (D. Mass.) Defendant’s inaccurate reporting causing plaintiff to be denied the ability to rent the apartment unit of his choice. Settled April 5, 2024, 2024
- Collins v. Anthem, Inc., Case No. 20-CV-01969 (E.D.N.J.) Won Class Certification on behalf of class of patients improperly denied residential treatment for ERISA violations and violations of the Mental Health Parity Act., 2024
- Chesemore v. Fenkell, No. 18-CV-724-WMC, 2023 WL 2707451 (W.D. Wis. Mar. 30, 2023) Post-bench trial verdict (I first-chaired trial, which was held in November 2020) in favor of plaintiff in part, as the Court ordered, after a bench trial, that transfer of proceeds from Defendant's 2018 tax refunds to his wife violated the Pennsylvania Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act ("PUFTA") and is NULL and VOID., 2023
- Prescott v. Reckitt Benckiser, Case 5:20-cv-02101-BLF (N.D. Cal.) Class action settlement reached March 15, 2023., 2023
- Bugielski et al. v. AT&T Services, Inc. et al., Case No. No. 21-56196 (9th Cir.): Won reversal in the 9th Circuit in a class action lawsuit against AT&T regarding the company's failure to investigate the recordkeeping fees charged by a vendor to the 401(K) plan and engaging in prohibited transactions re same; Defendants are currently seeking review in the Supreme Court., 2023
- Chesemore et al. v. Fenkell, No. 18-cv-724-wmc (2023) Verdict after post-trial briefing (trial in November 2020, I acted as sole trial counsel): Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit to reclaim moneys Defendant incorrectly characterized upon transfer within the applicable statute of repose as his wife's or as "entireties" assets in violation of the Pennsylvania Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act ("PUFTA"), 12 Pa. Cons. Stat. §§ 5101 et seq., in attempts to collect on a prior judgement against him ordering his ill-gotten profits resulting from numerous fiduciary breaches in connection the Trachte Building Systems Inc. ESOP. On November 2, 2020, the court held a trial to the bench on plaintiffs' PUFTA claim, and after post-trial briefing, the court found that transfers arising out of federal tax refunds violated PUFTA, (although he also found that a settlement payment did not.) Accordingly, the court found in favor of plaintiffs as to the tax refunds., 2023
- Becker v. Wells Fargo & Co., et al., Case No. 0:20-cv-02016 (KMM/BRT) (D. Minn.): On March 13, 2020, a participant in Wells Fargo & Company 401(k) Plan (the “Plan”) filed a class action lawsuit against Wells Fargo & Company (“Wells Fargo”), their Employee Benefit Review Committee, and other Defendants challenging the management of the Plan. The action is brought on behalf of all participants and beneficiaries of the Wells Fargo & Company 401(k) Plan who invested in funds Defendants selected for the Plan that are affiliated with Wells Fargo—specifically, the Wells Fargo/State Street Target Date Collective Investment Trusts, the Wells Fargo/Causeway International Value Fund, the Wells Fargo Treasury Money Market Fund, and the Wells Fargo Emerging Growth Fund, among others. Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants violated federal law by repeatedly and improperly selecting investment options affiliated with Wells Fargo for the Plan, even though these affiliated options retained higher fees and poorer performance than alternative competitor funds. Plaintiffs allege that selecting these affiliated options benefitted Wells Fargo at the expense of Wells Fargo’s employees by providing Wells Fargo with additional revenue from the funds’ fees and seeding the affiliated options with Plan assets to make them more attractive investments to outside investors. Final Approval of Settlement was granted in August of 2022; Wells Fargo paid current and former participants of their 401(k) plan $32.5M, in addition to various forms of equitable relief., 2022
- Baird v. BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A. et al, 4:17-cv-01892 (N.D. Cal.) This case settled in March 2021 when BlackRock agreed to pay $9.6 million to end an ERISA class action brought by us accusing it of costing workers and retirees millions in unreasonable 401(k) plan fees and bad investment decisions. The settlement covered about 17,000 investors who participated in BlackRock's retirement savings plan from April 2011 through mid 2021, 2021
- Smith v. OSF Healthcare System et al., Case No. 3:16-cv-00467-SMY-RJD: Settled case on behalf of class of Plaintiffs who were participants in the OSF Plan and sued for violations of ERISA; the particular claim was that OSF was not entitled to claim "church plan" status to evade ERISA. The Settlement calls for a $25 million cash contribution from OSF, and other non-monetary equitable relief. The requested award for attorneys’ fees, expenses and incentive awards for the Named Plaintiffs (“Fee Award”) will be separately paid by OSF, and cannot exceed $1.75 million. OSF will make payment to Class Counsel pursuant to the Fee Award granted by the Court within thirty (30) days after the Court’s entry of a Final Approval Order. The first $5 million installment of the Settlement Payment will be put into the Master Trust in fiscal year 2021; the cash payments for each year can be made in installments or in a lump sum. OSF will continue to make cash contributions of $5 million per year through fiscal year 2025, although it can end earlier, as OSFs’ cash contribution requirement ends once the amount deposited into the Master Trust pursuant to this Settlement reaches $25 million., 2020
- Trump v. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People et al., 18-588: The Supreme Court upheld Judge Bates' decision in the D.C. district court vacating the government's purported rescission of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals and reinstating DACA., 2020
- Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, et al.: Defended clients against the government, which filed a writ of certiorari in the United States Supreme Court before judgment from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was rendered. After winning twice in the district court on behalf of our clients; the NAACP, the AFT, and the UFCW, the case was appealed by the government to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, where we briefed and argued the case before the government sought Supreme Court review. On June 28, 2019, 2019
- Owens et al v. St. Anthony Medical Center Inc. et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-04068, U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois: Former employees of St. Anthony Medical Center allowed to proceed with breach-of-contract, fiduciary breach, and negligence claims under Indiana state law, the judge ruled Sept. 29. The workers argue their pension benefits were cut by as much as 30 percent when the plan was terminated after recording a funding shortfall of more than $32 million. The ruling suggests a path forward for other hospital workers whose challenges to underfunded pension plans hit a roadblock in 2017, when the U.S. Supreme Court made it more difficult for these workers to sue under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. UPDATE: We successfully settled this case at the end of 2018 and the Court gave final approval at an April 2019 fairness hearing., 2018
- National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Donald J. Trump, in his official capacity as President of the United States, et al., Case No. 1:17-cv-01907, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia - Judge John D. Bates of Federal District Court for the District of Columbia said that the administration’s decision to terminate the program, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, was based on the “virtually unexplained” grounds that the program was “unlawful.” Appeal pending., 2018
- OneBeacon America Insurance Company v. Narragansett Electric Company - successfully defeated coverage under excess insurance policies with a novel statute of limitations argument., 2010
Videos
- On the Astonishing Healthcare podcast, I discuss the Department of Labor's proposed PBM transparency rules and the comments I submitted to strengthen the regulations. I explore how greater transparency in PBM compensation, rebates, and other indirect payments can improve fiduciary oversight, reduce litigation risk, and help plan sponsors make more informed purchasing decisions. I also discuss the growing importance of medical-benefit drug spending, the role of machine-readable data in improving compliance and benchmarking, and how evolving federal and state laws are reshaping the healthcare marketplace., AH106 - What You Need to Know About the DOL’s Proposed PBM Rules, with Julie Selesnick, Health Plans, Employers, Commercial Health Care, 2026
- Are you aware of the hidden inefficiencies and costs in your company’s healthcare plan? In this episode of Broken Healthcare, I sit down with Julie Selesnick, an expert in ERISA law and healthcare compliance. Julie sheds light on how employers can better navigate healthcare regulations and make impactful decisions for their teams. We dive into key issues like the Consolidated Appropriations Act (CAA), fiduciary responsibilities, and the pivotal role employers play in shaping the future of healthcare. Julie shares eye-opening insights into the mismanagement in the system and actionable steps employers can take to drive meaningful change., Discover the Hidden Costs of Healthcare: Julie Selesnick on ERISA, CAA, and Employer Responsibility, Healthcare, Employers, Brokers, Employee Benefits, Compliance, 2025
- If I’m a plan sponsor or actually, again, an EBC (employee benefit consultant) or broker, now what? What should I be doing and thinking about right now? First, we talk about the first step for pretty much everybody: Get your data, plan sponsors. But once you have that data, you also kind of have to use it. You can use it to ensure that you’re paying claims right, which is what most do. As a result of these two lawsuits, it’s also increasingly clear that you also have to use that data to ensure that the prices you’re paying for things (like generic specialty meds, for example) are fair and reasonable. Then we get into … okay, once you have the data and you’ve analyzed it, what are some in general things that could very well need to happen? And if the reason that they don’t happen is because they weren’t even considered, then plan sponsors have some risk exposure; and the brokers/EBCs who serve them might have some conflicts of interest. And it would be very interesting what would or could happen if a plan sponsor was able to back into those conflicts of interest, because if data clearly shows that something should be happening and it is not—and it is not even on the docket to be considered—if I’m a plan sponsor, I’m for sure gonna be wondering why. And maybe I’m gonna look into that and fast. Lastly, we get into a bunch of stuff that plan sponsors might want to consider as they consider how to administer their plan, like, for example, setting up a health and welfare committee that has an independent fiduciary expert on said committee., Relentless Health Value EP428: Do-It-Now Advice From the J&J and the DOL v BCBS Lawsuits, With Julie Selesnick, Healthcare, Employers, Healthcare Purchasers, Brokers And Consultants, Employee Benefits, Compliance, 2024
- A wonderful conversation with Julie Selesnick, Senior Counsel for Berger Montague! Discussion about CAA of 2021, employer responsibility, lawsuits against employers, cross-plan offsetting, blue card program, other health plan issues that put fiduciaries at risk., Self Fund Health: Chat with Matt - Julie Selesnick Post CAA, Healthcare, Private Employers, Employee Benefits, Third-Party Administrators, Compliance, 2024
- Lester J. Morales interviews Attorney Julie S. Selesnick, Senior Counsel at Berger Montague. With a passion for justice amongst the imbalance of power between health insurers and American healthcare consumers, Julie serves as a member of the firm's Employee Benefits & ERISA practice group. Don't miss this opportunity to learn: 3 myths that hamper employers' success as fiduciaries of their health plans The top 3 action items for employers to jumpstart their fiduciary compliance How to eradicate gag clauses Julie's top recommendations for employers, advisers, and American healthcare consumers, A Powerhouse ERISA Attorney Busts 3 Myths Impeding Your Fiduciary Compliance with Julie Selesnick, Healthcare, Employers, Brokers, Employee Benefits, Compliance, 2023
- This is an excerpt from a webinar discussing the compensation disclosures required by brokers and consultants to ERISA-covered health plans as a result of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021., Compensation Disclosures for Brokers and Consultants to health plans under the CAA of 2021, Employee Benefits, Human Resources, UNIONS, Taft-Hartley Plans, 2022
- A discussion to inform health plan fiduciaries of the new requirements under the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 and the No Surprises Act of 2021 and how the new rules can be used as a powerful tool in the fight to control health care costs., Employer Fiduciary Alert York SHRM April 12, 2022, Employee Benefits, Human Resources, UNIONS, Taft-Hartley Plans, 2022
- Excerpt from a webinar discussing the 2021 Consolidated Appropriations Act requiring the removal of gag clauses from contracts related to ERISA-covered health plans and the attestation requirements contained therein., Impact of the CAA of 2021 on Gag Clauses, Employee Benefits, Human Resources, UNIONS, Taft-Hartley Plans, 2022
- Excerpt from a webinar about the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 focused on the three most important new rules for health plan sponsors to keep in mind., Three Most Important Things to Keep in Mind about the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, Employee Benefits, Human Resources, UNIONS, Taft-Hartley Plans, 2022
Representative Clients
- Joined case as counsel of record in class action lawsuit Atlantic Neurosurgical Specialists P.A. et al v. UnitedHealthcare Group et al, 2:20-CV-13834 (D.N.J. 2020). Allegations are that Defendant violated ERISA and breached their fiduciary duty by failing to provide a full and fair review on appeal due to unreasonable internal procedures for determining whether an individual has been authorized to act on behalf of a claimant in violation of the ERISA claims procedure regulation., 2024
- Joined case as counsel of record in class action lawsuit Tamburrino, M.D. et al v. UnitedHealth Group Inc., et al 2:21-CV-12766 (D.N.J. 2021). Allegations are that Defendants breached class members health plans by denying Plaintiffs and class members benefits for breast reconstruction in violation of ERISA, causing damages., 2024
- Joined case as counsel of record on behalf of Plaintiffs in class action lawsuit Redstone M.D. et al v. Aetna et al., 2:21-CV-19434 (D.N.J. 2021). Allegations are that Defendant violated ERISA by failing to reimburse NAP providers at the NAP rates for services rendered to Aetna members covered under NAP plans., 2024
- Joined case as counsel of record on behalf of Plaintiffs in class action lawsuit Shapiro et al v. Aetna et al., 2:22-CV-01958 (D.N.J. 2022) Allegations that Defendant violated ERISA because they improperly reimbursed member claims (under-reimbursed non-network providers) for benefits for involuntary services provided to a NAP plan member by an non-network provider without a NAP contract vendor agreement., 2024
- Massachusetts Laborers Health & Welfare Fund: Sued on behalf of our client and all similarly situated self-funded health plans that use Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts to administer their plans for overcharging for healthcare and administrative services as the fund's third-party administrator and failing to follow the terms of the Administrative Service Agreement(s). The complaint also alleges the payer purposefully hide and adopted internal policies that allowed it to pay claims inconsistent with the contract it had with the labor fund. The complaint alleges a breach of contract and violations of state law, including unfair and deceptive business practices., 2023
- Spurlock et al v. Wexford Health Sources, 3:23-CV-00476 (S.D.W. Va. 2023) Representing Plaintiffs in class action litigation alleging failure of private prison health care defendant to provide MOUDs to prisoners with opioid use disorder violates the 8th Amendment ban against cruel and unusual punishment., 2023
- Collins v. Anthem, Inc., Case No. 20-CV-01969 (E.D.N.J.): Joined case as co-counsel in 2023 representing four plaintiffs individually and as representatives of a class of patients who were improperly denied residential treatment under a health plan; lawsuit alleges violations of ERISA and the Mental Health Parity Act., 2023
- Azam Ahmed et al. v. Cigna Health Management et al.: Representing him in his individual capacity and as a representative of a putative class of plaintiffs whose claims for coverage under a health plan were improperly denied by Cigna Corp, 2023
- Smith v. UnitedHealth Group Inc. et al Case No. 2022cv01658 (D. Minn.) Represent two plaintiffs individually and on behalf of a putative class of participants in self-funded health plans whose benefit payments were improperly offset to remedy an overpayment made by UnitedHealth Group under a different health plan; case alleges breaches of fiduciary duty under ERISA., 2022
- Trustees of the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers Local 1 Connecticut Health Fund et al v. Elevance, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:22-CV-01541 (Dec. 5, 2022 D. Conn.) I am lead counsel and filed this ERISA class action lawsuit on behalf of the trustees of two Taft-Hartley trust health plans against Elevance alleging that Elevance (a.k.a. Anthem) and its subsidiaries unlawfully refuses to allow self-funded health plans with which it contracts to access their own plan claims data in violation of federal laws, and allegedly does this as part of its efforts to conceal its improper repricing of health provider claims and its failure to pass on the full value of the discounts it has negotiated with providers to the self-funded plans that purchase access to the Anthem network at Anthem’s negotiated rates. Based on a limited amount of claims data the plans were able to access and review, the Complaint further alleges that Anthem failed to apply the promised discounts found in each health plan’s administrative service agreement and failed to pass on the entire discount to which each plan was entitled based on the negotiated rates between Anthem and the providers in the Anthem network. A Motion to Dismiss has been fully briefed and is pending; discovery has begun., 2022
- Scott v. AT&T, Case No. 3:20-cv-07094-JD (N.D. Cal.): This lawsuit, Scott v. AT&T Inc., filed on October 12, 2020, is brought on behalf of a class of participants and beneficiaries in the AT&T Pension Benefit Plan (the “AT&T Plan”). Plaintiffs allege that Defendants AT&T Inc. and AT&T Services violated the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”). Through these violations, Plaintiffs allege that they were deprived of accrued, vested pension benefits when they receive their pension benefit in the form of a Joint and Survivor Annuity, the default form of benefit for married participants. This has resulted in AT&T Plan participants and beneficiaries receiving less than the actuarial equivalent of their vested accrued benefit, contrary to ERISA’s requirements. This lawsuit seeks to recover amounts due to members of the class, and to amend the AT&T Plan to fully comply with protections afforded by ERISA to defined benefit pension plan participants and beneficiaries., 2021
- Chesemore et al. v. Fenkell, Civil Action No. 3:18-cv-0724, (W.D. Wis.) Litigated PUFTA claims brought under the Pennsylvania Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act seeking to unwind various transactions that left the plaintiff unable to pay a legal judgment. Bench trial held in November 2020, and post-trial briefing concluded in January 2021; awaiting decision., 2018
- In Re: Society Insurance Company Covid-19 Business Interruption Protection Insurance Litigation, MDL No. 2964, Master Docket No. 1:20-cv-05965 (N.D. Ill.). Consolidated cases against Society Insurance of claims made by policyholders for business interruptions arising out of government closure orders. Society's Motion to Dismiss was denied and discovery is ongoing., 2020
- Mudpie, Inc. v. Travelers Casualty Insurance Company of America, Case 4:20-cv-03213-JST (N.D. Cal.) Insurance coverage dispute arising from denial of a business interruption claim made pursuant to government orders requiring the insured to close to the public and then make material alterations to the storefront/interior before reopening to a restricted public. Currently on appeal before 9th Circuit; oral arguments were held on August 11, 2021., 2020
- Scott et al. v. UnitedHealth Group et al., Case No. 20-cv-01570-PJS-TNL (D. Minn. 2020): On July 14, 2020, we filed this class action lawsuit challenging United’s taking of “cross-plan offsets” against the thousands of Plans it administers. Cross-plan offsetting occurs when United uses the assets from one Employee Health Plan to recoup a financial loss from another, separate Plan. By engaging in cross-plan offsetting, United treats the thousands of Plans it administers as one extremely large piggybank, moving more than $1.2 billion among its Plans each year to suit its own interests. The lawsuit alleges that cross-plan offsetting violates ERISA, and in most cases, the money ends up in United’s own pocket. Oral arguments on the Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment will be held on January 27, 2020.
- LENORE R. OWENS, JEAN L. JEWETT, LORI L. BUKSAR, and JULIA SNYDER, on behalf of themselves, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 2017
- Charles Baird, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, and on behalf of the BlackRock Retirement Savings Plan. This case is set for trial in March of 2020., 2017
- UFCW (United Food and Commercial Workers Union), 2017
- AFT (American Federation of Teachers), 2017
- NAACP (National Association for the Advancement of Colored People), 2017
- Smith et al. v. OSF et al: Represent clients in an ERISA action in the Southern District of Illinois. After summary judgment was granted in favor of the defendants in the district court, the 7th Circuit ruled in August of 2019 that the district court abused its discretion in granting the motion for summary judgment filed by the defendant-hospital, holding that since the summary judgment motion was filed long before discovery was to close, and the discovery sought by plaintiff was material to the summary judgment issue regarding whether plan committees are “principal-purpose” organizations within meaning of ERISA. The Seventh Circuit further noted that plaintiff established strong record of diligence in pursuing discovery that included generation of pending discovery disputes, and that additional discovery sought in plaintiff’s Rule 56(d) motion would not have been futile. This case was successfully settled in 2020; the joint notice of settlement was filed on July 30, 2020. The Class Action Settlement Agreement was signed by the parties on September 17, 2020. Judge Staci M. Yandle granted preliminary approval of the Settlement Agreement on October 7, 2020. A fairness hearing is scheduled for January 15, 2021., 2016
- Barbara Dury: Successfully represented her in a District of Columbia Human Rights Action against her former employer, alleging violations of the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act. After almost two years of stonewalling by her former employer, there was a mandatory mediation. By the end of the mediation, I secured a favorable settlement for Ms. Dury, and according to the mediator, it was the second highest settlement of an age-based discrimination claim in which that office participated., 2013
Pro bono / Community Service
- Assisting individuals in applying for financial assistance from tax exempt hospitals to reduce or eliminate what they are charged for medically necessary care., 2024
- Assisting individuals in applying for financial assistance from tax exempt hospitals to reduce or eliminate what they are charged for medically necessary care., 2023
- Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, et al.: continue to work with lawyers from other DACA defenders in light of new ruling by Judge Hanen in Texas finding DACA to be illegal; call with DOJ to determine how to proceed and follow-up calls and meetings with pro bono team to discuss options., 2020
- Donald J. Trump, President of the United States, et al. v. National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, et al.: Defended our clients against the government, which filed a writ of certiori in the United States Supreme Court before judgment from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was rendered. After winning twice in the district court on behalf of our clients; the NAACP, the AFT, and the UFCW, the case was appealed by the government to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, where we briefed and argued the case before the government sought Supreme Court review. On June 28, 2019, the Supreme Court granted the government's petition for certiori despite the fact no ruling had yet been issued by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and the Court consolidated all of the DACA cases for which the government sought review. The Supreme Court heard oral argument on these cases on November 12, 2019. A decision is expected no later than June 2020. This was an amazing experience; in addition to the intersection of law and politics, and the opportunity to work with some of the finest lawyers in the country, I met so many amazing DACA recipients and participated in a rally on behalf of them and DREAMERS in general. I am hopeful we win, but I am heartened by what fighters the DACA activists are and I hope to continue helping this community regardless of the Supreme Court decision., 2019
- On September 18, 2017, The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the country’s original civil rights organization, along with the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (UFCW) filed a lawsuit against President Trump, former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Department of Homeland Security then Acting Secretary Elaine Duke, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (“USCIS”), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”), and the United States of America, in defense of young, undocumented immigrants of color eligible for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). The NAACP, the AFT, and the UCWF bring this action on behalf of their members throughout the country who are currently enrolled in, and who applied to enroll in, the DACA program. On April 24, 2018 U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia John Bates found the memorandum issued by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) terminating the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program legally insufficient, holding that DHS’s rescission of DACA was “virtually unexplained” and as such “unlawful.” As such, Judge Bates vacated the rescission memorandum unless DHS can offer a stronger basis for ending the program affecting hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants, and allowed the government ninety (90) days from the entry of his Order to provide such an explanation. Judge Bates’s decision represents the first time that any court has vacated DHS’s “Rescission Memorandum,” and held that if DHS failed to provide an explanation by July 24, 2018 that meets Judge Bates’ requirements, DACA will be vacated in its entirety and DHS will be required to maintain the program for current enrollees and to accept and process applications from new enrollees who meet the program’s eligibility rules. Judge Bates then did vacate the rescission in its entirety, but held his ruling in abeyance while it is being appealed by the government., 2017
Educational Background
- San Diego State University, B.A. in Liberal Arts and Sciences Major: International Security and Conflict Resolution with a specialization in Cooperation, Conflict, and Conflict Resolution, Double Minor: Political Science and History Graduated cum laude, 1998
White Papers
- The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (CAA), which amended ERISA, is the most significant regulatory challenge for employers since the 2009 enactment of the Affordable Care Act. One rarely discussed requirement in the new law: Employers and other purchasers must also focus on the quality of care employees and their families receive, not just the cost. The issue of compliance is increasingly urgent: In the past few months, several prominent lawsuits have been filed, and on February 23, 2023, the Department of Labor issued key long-awaited new guidance that sets the stage for new enforcement. This Whitepaper discusses how to be a proper fiduciary in general, and establishing a process for evaluating quality when administering health benefits, including existing resources for benchmarking quality and health equity issues., The CAA and Healthcare Quality, Employee Benefits, Healthcare, Financial Services, Brokers, Hospitals, Health Care Purchasers, Taft-Hartley Health Plans, 2023
Scholarly Lectures / Writings
- he dismissal of an employee-led class action lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson (J&J), which accused J&J and the J&J health plan fiduciaries of mismanaging the health plan’s prescription drug benefit, might lead health plan sponsors to believe that they will not be held responsible for proper management of the prescription drug benefit and rigorous oversight of Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) providing services to their employee health plan. That is a dangerous and incorrect assumption, however; this lawsuit was dismissed on procedural grounds, and nothing in the Opinion and Order dismissing the lawsuit eliminates or reduced the fiduciary obligations that health plan fiduciaries must meet under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). It has never been more important for health plan fiduciaries to scrutinize the agreements they enter into with PBMs, obtain compensation disclosures from their PBM to root out all conflicts of interest, and monitor their contracted PBM’s performance to ensure that prescription drug benefits are managed transparently, in accordance with the health plan documents and ERISA, and in the best interest of plan participants., Author, Why Healthcare Plan Fiduciaries Must Remain Vigilant, Plan Sponsor Council of America, Healthcare, Private Employers, Brokers, Employee Benefits, Compliance, 2025
- Panel Session - Is my Company at Risk? Leading the Charge in Proactively Addressing Litigation Challenges, Panelist, Challenging the Health Plan Status Quo, 4C Digital Health, Healthcare, Private Employers, Employee Benefits, Compliance, 2025
- Discussion of Transparency Regulations and the difficulties employers face gaining access to the data allowed under the law; provide strategies and techniques for negotiating with carriers and PBMs to access data and perform payment integrity functions., Panelist, Structural Implications of Transparency Regulations on Employers, The Third Virtual National Health Care Transparency and No Surprises Act Summit, Healthcare, Private Employers, Employee Benefits, Compliance, 2024
- Discussion of fiduciary breach litigation against health plans and third-party administrators ("TPAs"); discuss strategies for health plan sponsors and independent TPAs to minimize risk and gain access to necessary data without losing access to network., Presenter, ERISA Fiduciary Breach Legislation and Independent TPAs, HCAA Executive Forum, Healthcare, Private Employers, Employee Benefits, Third-Party Administrators, Compliance, 2024
- The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (CAA) raised the bar on fiduciary responsibilities for employers - and, as litigation risk heightens, many are wrestling with how to effectively exercise their duties. Gain insights into how to efficiently and effectively operationalize fiduciary oversight through educational presentations and interactive breakout sessions., Trainer, Mitigating Risk: Essential Training for Healthcare Plan Fiduciaries, National Alliance of Healthcare Purchasing Coalitions, Healthcare, Employers, Healthcare Purchasers, Employee Benefits, Compliance, 2024
- In this session, Justin Leader, CEO of Benefits DNA, and Julie Selesnick, Senior Counsel at Berger Montague, explore the significant legal and operational hurdles faced by advisors and fiduciaries of employer and union-sponsored health plans. This session provides a detailed recap of the application of legal rules and the day-to-day challenges encountered in this complex field. Viewers will leave with a clearer understanding of the legal and operational landscape, along with actionable strategies to address ongoing challenges and advance their efforts in managing union and employer-sponsored health plans effectively., Co-Presenter, Navigating Challenges in Employer and Union Health Plans: Insights and Strategies for Effective Solutions, Health Rosetta, Healthcare, Private Employers, Brokers, Employee Benefits, Compliance, 2024
- Discover fresh and diverse perspectives from seasoned industry veterans who have successfully implemented direct contracts on top of traditional commercial provider networks for years. You'll learn that networks can be highly effective when crafted and managed appropriately, and that transparent navigation is just as crucial as transparent pricing for gaining member buy-in and ensuring downstream engagement. Additionally, you'll explore why population-based payment is considered the holy grail in this field., Panelist, The Promise of Direct Access: How Employers & Vendors Can Avoid Being Sued While Saving Millions, Health Rosetta, Healthcare, Private Employers, Employee Benefits, Compliance, Healthcare Providers, 2024
- 10:45 –11:30 AM Decided in Court: Lawsuits to Access Pricing and Claims Data Self-insured plan sponsors have filed a number of lawsuits to get access to the plans’ claims data. Other lawsuits have challenged and changed the course of the No Surprises Act. Some cases have settled, while others are still making their way through the courts. What’s the latest? What do these lawsuits mean for increased price and claims data transparency, and how should we plan for the future?, Presenter/Panelist, Healthcare Price Transparency Forum, Self Insured Institute of America ("SIIA"), Healthcare, Private Employers, Employee Benefits, Compliance, 2024
- The CAA amends the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), the federal law that sets minimum standards for voluntarily established employee benefit plans to protect plan participants and their beneficiaries and allows certain benefits, including health benefits, to be treated as tax-free compensation. The CAA clarifies the fiduciary obligations of employers and other benefit plan fiduciaries under ERISA, including accountability for the reasonableness of plan costs. This article discusses two critical provisions employers need to focus on right now: the removal of gag clauses in all contracts related to access to providers or networks of providers (or pharmacies), and obtaining compensation disclosures from all covered service providers., co-author, CAA: Buckle Your Seatbelts Folks, Things are About to Get Wild, The National Association of Plan Advisors, Summer 2023, pages 38-41, Employee Benefits, Human Resources, UNIONS, Taft-Hartley Plans, Brokers, Consultants, health plan service providers, 2023
- This article discusses the new disclosure requirements that must be made for ERISA-covered health plans regarding compensation, and argues that a broad interpretation of consultants and brokers should be applied to achieve Congress' goals in enacting the legislation and to effectuate the DOL guidance regarding transparency for the purpose of allowing plan sponsors to evaluate reasonableness., Author, Health Plan Servicers' Disclosure Rule Objections Are Faulty, Law360, Employee Benefits, Human Resources, UNIONS, Taft-Hartley Plans, 2022
- An explanation of what actuarial equivalence means under ERISA and discuss pending litigation in that area., co-author, The Escalating Litigation Involving Actuarial Equivalence on Taft-Hartley Plans: No End in Sight, Shareholder Advocate, Summer 2021 at p. 5, Securities, Employee Benefits, Union Leaders, 2021
- This is a lengthy article advising fiduciaries of their obligations to monitor third-parties and reviewing recent enforcement actions by the DOL against fiduciaries for the failure to monitor., co-author, Engaging and Monitoring Health Plan TPAs: Understanding Your Fiduciary Obligations, Benefits Magazine, Legal, HR, Employee Benefits, 2020
- I wrote a short FAQ regarding the impact of the CARES Act on employee benefit plans for employers and employees., Author, Employee Benefits/ERISA: COVID-19 Frequently Asked Questions, Business Woman PA, All, 2020
- I wrote the chapter of a cumulative supplement relating to employee benefits which are not covered by ERISA; this includes church plans, governmental plans, and some other minor exceptions., Author, ERISA Litigation Sixth Edition 2019 Cumulative Supplement; Ch. 3: Plans Excluded From ERISA Coverage, The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., Legal, HR, Employee Benefits, 2019
- Many traditional 401(K) plans are being replaced with employee stock ownership plans (“ESOPs”). While in many cases an ESOP is a valuable benefit to employees, they are also vulnerable to abuse. This article explores some of the vulnerabilities., Author, “Employee Stock Ownership Plans: Vulnerable to Abuse?”, Cohen Milstein Benefits Blog, Fiduciaries, ESOPs, Employee Benefits, 2018
- An ESOP is a qualified defined-contribution employee benefit plan designed to invest primarily in the stock of the sponsoring employer. While ESOPs are often used to give the employees a vested interest in the company’s success, which harms employees and violates the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), a federal statute that protects employee retirement assets from abuse. Because ESOPs must comply with ERISA, there is a fiduciary duty for those who administer, manage, or control ESOP plan assets, and the fiduciaries must act solely in the interest of plan participants and beneficiaries. A group of twenty-seven legislators has authored President Trump and the Department of Labor (“DOL”) to provide the ESOP industry with guidance on substantive issues, most importantly the issue of valuation, and to stop engaging in what it termed “regulation through litigation”. The letter asks the DOL to collaborate with the ESOP community and basically requests the President and the DOL to stop engaging in enforcement activities until such meaningful guidance is provided. The question in the article is whether the current Congresspersons who sent the letter to the DOL are acting to help their constituents or their donors., Author, “Is Congress Protecting Its Constituents or Running Interference for Bad Actors?”, Cohen Milstein Benefits Blog, ESOP, Employee Benefits, 2018
- Silt, Sediment and Stormwater: Pollutants Under the Pollution Exclusion?, Author, DRI - The Voice, 2010
Other Outstanding Achievements
- I started the EOB Podcast in January 2026. My cohost and I break down what’s really happening inside health plans, contracts, laws, rules, regulations, and everything else related to employer sponsored health plans in plain English, spreading awareness of the opaque practices that contribute to the ever-rising cost of health care., 2026
- As an Of Counsel at Cohen Milstein, I designed a blog for the ERISA group which is now an integrated feature of the website. I wrote several of the initial postings, but now it is a vibrant blog with regular postings from a variety of individuals., 2018
- Elected to The George Washington Law School Law Review, 1999
- Named the Outstanding Graduate at San Diego State in her major, which was ISCOR - International Security and Conflict Resolution. Ms. Selesnick's thesis was titled The Efficacy and Use of Economic Sanctions as a Tool of Foreign Policy: Case Study Iraq., 1998
Honors
- Nationally ranked for commercial litigation and ERISA, Regionally ranked for commercial litigation, ERISA, and employee benefits law., National Rankings and Regional Rankings, Best Law Firms, 2025
- Selected to Super Lawyers: 2019 - 2026
- The 2024 United States edition of The Legal 500 recommended Berger Montague as a Top Tier Firm for Civil Litigation/Class Actions: Plaintiff. The Legal 500 notes, “Berger Montague remains highly active in plaintiff-side class action work, acting in high-profile cases for clients across multiple industries", Berger Montague named a "Top Tier" firm for Civil Litigation, The Legal 500, 2024
- I am honored to have been named to the National Law Journal's List of Plaintiffs' Lawyers Trailblazers for my work on the healthcare side of ERISA/employee benefits, which has not been a heavily litigated area under ERISA to date, and for my work on the DACA case brought by my clients, the NAACP, the AFT and the UFCW against Donald Trump and the Department of Homeland Security, arguing that the rescission of DACA violated the Administrative Procedures Act; we won in the District Court (DDC) and our win was upheld in a 5-4 decision of the Supreme Court., National Law Journal's list of Plaintiffs' Lawyers Trailblazers, The National Law Journal, 2021
- I was elected a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation (ABF). Membership is limited to just one percent of lawyers licensed to practice in each jurisdiction. Members are nominated by their peers and selected by the ABF Board. The ABF Fellows is a global honorary society that recognizes attorneys, judges, law faculty and legal scholars whose public and private careers have demonstrated outstanding dedication to the highest principles of the legal profession and to the welfare of their communities. ABF Fellows hail from nearly 40 countries and hold a wide variety of influential roles., Fellow, American Bar Foundation, 2021
- Named practice group of the year for a variety of reasons, including large settlements, novel cases, and several Supreme Court decisions., Member, Law360’s Practice Group of the Year-ERISA/Employee Benefits, Law 360, 2019
- Cohen Milstein was named one of 16 law firms in the nation to be included in The National Law Journal’s 2019 Pro Bono Hot List. Firms chosen “serve as examples to their peers in the industry for their work providing legal services for the underserved.” Of the 16 firms recognized in 2019, Cohen Milstein is the only plaintiffs’ firm. The honor recognized several high-profile cases in which Cohen Milstein has been involved as lead or co-lead counsel or played a principal role – all in a pro bono capacity. One of those cases is the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People v. Trump, No. 1:17-cv-01907 (D.D.C.) As previously mentioned, we just defended the order granting summary judgment to our clients and ordering vacatur of the DACA rescission memo in the Supreme Court on November 12, 2019. A decision is expected no later than June of 2020., Pro Bono Hotlist, The National Law Journal, 2019
- The Order of the Coif is an honorary scholastic society the purpose of which is to encourage excellence in legal education by fostering a spirit of careful study, recognizing those who as law students attained a high grade of scholarship., Member, Order of the Coif, 2001
- The Phi Beta Kappa Society is the oldest and most prestigious academic honor society in the United States, due to its long history and academic selectivity., Member, Phi Beta Kappa, 1998
- Golden Key is the world's largest collegiate honor society; membership is by invitation only and applies to the top 15% of college and university sophomores, juniors and seniors, as well as top-performing graduate students in all fields of study, based solely on their academic achievements., Member, Golden Key International Honour Society, 1998
Industry Groups
- Employers
- health plan participants & beneficiaries
- Other.
- plan fiduciaries
- Taft-Hartley plan sponsors
- Vendors
Selections
8 Years Super Lawyers
- Super Lawyers: 2019 - 2026
