An attempted overly-aggressive and insensitive "corporate raid" with consequences for health insurance policy holders has prompted me to call upon Congress to enact a legislative remedy. The act in question was Wal-mart's attempt to raid a trust fund set up for Debbie Shank, 52, a Jackson, MO mother of three whose soldier son was recently killed while on duty in Iraq. This potentially tragic story could be repeated many times because of language imbedded in fine print in many health insurance policies allowing for subrogation. For this reason I urge Congress to enact legislation to prevent other companies engaging in what is now legalized highway robbery.Debbie Shank, a former employee of Wal-mart, suffered severe brain damage from a traffic accident that left her in a wheelchair and living in a nursing home. A $1 million judgment against the trucking company involved in the crash was collected about six years ago. At that point, $417,000 was placed in a trust fund to provide for Debbie Shank's long-term care.Wal-mart had paid out about $470,000 for Shank's medical care and started legal action to recover its expense. Relying on fine print in its health plan policy, Wal-mart then started legal action to recover the $470,000 from the Shank trust fund. The Shanks filed a lawsuit against Wal-mart so the trust fund could be preserved for its intended use. The Shanks lost that lawsuit, appealed the ruling, and Wal-mart won the appeal - a week before Debbie's son was killed in Iraq. The US Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal in March 2008."They are quite within their rights," said Jim Shank, Debbie's husband, at the time. "But I just wonder if they need it that bad." For the third quarter of 2007, Wal-mart reported net sales of $90 billion.Wal-mart apparently agreed because on April 1 it sent a letter to the Shank Family that it would not seek to collect the money the Shanks won in the injury lawsuit. A Wal-mart spokesman stated that the Shank's "extraordinary situation" made the company re-examine its position. It was the extraordinary publicity surrounding the case that made Wal-Mart re-think its position. They could not stand the negative PR so they changed their tune.It is increasingly common for health plans to seek reimbursement for medical expenses they pay for someone's treatment if that person collects damage in an injury lawsuit. That practice, known as subrogation, has increased since 2006 when a U.S. Supreme Court ruling made it easier to do.The Shank family's financial condition had become so perilous that Jim Shank had to divorce Debbie so she could receive assistance from Medicaid. Jim Shank, 54, is working two jobs while recovering from prostate cancer.A lot of companies, like Ford and GM, have health insurance policies containing provisions that allow them to recover their costs in the same manner Wal-mart has done. Many HMOs also contain this subrogation provision which serves little purpose other than to rob from the poor and give to the rich.I caution individuals to examine their health insurance policy to see whether this recovery procedure is buried in the fine print of their policy. If your policy includes this clause you may want to get another policy. After all, what benefit exists for you in an insurance policy that legalizes a raid on your family trust funds? If Congress does not act to stop this type of greedy corporate raid then we all need to take individual action to protect ourselves. For more information visit: www.cochranfoley.com