Employee Benefits & Executive Compensation Blog

The View from Proskauer on Developments in the World of Employee Benefits, Executive Compensation & ERISA Litigation

Tag Archives: Standard of Review

Ninth Circuit Defers to Plan Design and Administrative Discretion on Bounds of Mental Health Coverage

A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Wit et al. v. United Behavioral Health and Alexander et al. v. United Behavioral Health) exemplifies the challenge in balancing a desire to cover evolving treatments for mental health and substance abuse disorders against plan sponsors’ and insurers’ general authority over plan … Continue Reading

Choice-of-Law Plan Provision Enforced As A Matter of Federal Common Law

The Tenth Circuit recently concluded that, as a matter of federal common law, a choice-of-law provision in a long-term disability insurance policy, which was part of the plaintiff’s employer’s ERISA plan, must be enforced because a “clear, uniform rule . . . is required to ensure plan administrators enjoy the predictable obligations and reduced administrative … Continue Reading

Best Practices in Administering Benefit Claims #8 – Facing Litigation of Benefit Claims

Up to now, our blog series has focused on best practices for implementing a plan’s claims and appeals procedure.  We shift gears this week to see how following these best practices pays dividends if a participant’s (or beneficiary’s) claim is denied and the participant decides to pursue the claim for benefits in court (or, if … Continue Reading

Fifth Circuit: Procedural Win Is Not Grounds for Attorney’s Fees

The Fifth Circuit concluded that a plan participant was not entitled to recover attorneys’ fees for obtaining a remand order requiring the district court to apply a de novo, rather than abuse of discretion, standard of review to the administrative determination of her benefit claim.  In so ruling, the Court applied the principles enunciated by … Continue Reading

Tenth Circuit Upholds Denial of Residential Mental Health Treatment

The Tenth Circuit upheld a claims administrator’s decision denying a claim for residential mental health treatment as not medically necessary. In so holding, the Court rejected plaintiff’s argument that the claims administrator’s refusal to produce data on its historical denial rates for mental health treatment warranted a de novo review because that information was not … Continue Reading

Categorical Conflict of Interest Does Not Alter Standard of Review of Benefit Denials

The Second Circuit held that plaintiffs’ allegations that the defendant suffered from a “categorical potential conflict of interest”—because it both funded the plan and was the claim’s decision-maker—did not affect the application of the arbitrary and capricious standard of review in the absence of a showing by the plaintiffs that the conflict actually affected the … Continue Reading

On Remand, District Court Rules for the Fiduciaries in Tatum v. R.J. Reynolds

The R.J. Reynolds defendants have again prevailed against allegations that they breached their fiduciary duties by divesting the RJR 401(k) plan of funds invested in Nabisco stock.  Following remand by the Fourth Circuit, the district court held that a hypothetical fiduciary “would” have divested the plan of the Nabisco investments in the same time and … Continue Reading

Supreme Court Denies Review of Fourth Circuit Loss Causation Case

The U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to grant certiorari to review the Fourth Circuit’s decision in RJR Pension Investment, et al. v. Tatum, 761 F.3d 363 (4th Cir. 2014).  As we previously reported here, a divided panel of the Fourth Circuit held that, because the plaintiff proved that the plan fiduciaries acted imprudently by liquidating … Continue Reading

First Circuit Reviews Top Hat Plan Benefits Denial for Abuse of Discretion

The First Circuit recently applied an abuse of discretion standard of review to a claim for top hat plan benefits. Plaintiff Robert Niebauer, a former executive of Crane, brought a claim for executive severance plan benefits and a claim under ERISA section 510 for interference with his rights to benefits.  The district court granted summary … Continue Reading

Ninth Circuit Rules That Harmless Procedural Violation Does Not Alter Standard of Review

The Ninth Circuit held that a plan administrator’s failure to render a decision on a long-term disability benefits claim within the period mandated by the plan and ERISA did not alter the standard of review that the court should apply to the plan fiduciary’s decision concerning the claim.  Plaintiff Isela Dimery received long-term disability benefits … Continue Reading

Procedural Errors Don’t Alter Standard of Review In ERISA Claim for Benefits

The Ninth Circuit recently held that where an ERISA plan provides the plan administrator discretionary authority to determine benefit claims, procedural violations that occur during the course of the administrative claims process “do not alter the standard of review unless those violations are so flagrant as to alter the substantive relationship between the employer and … Continue Reading

A Court’s Review of a Disability Benefit Claim May Hinge on the Meaning “Satisfactory to Us”

Twenty-five years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that courts should review an ERISA participant’s claim for benefits under a de novo standard of review unless the plan gives the plan fiduciary discretionary authority to determine eligibility for benefits or to construe the terms of the plan.  Since then, courts have considered what type of … Continue Reading

Sixth Circuit Rejects Claim for Reinstatement of Erroneous Benefit Payments to Ineligible Retiree

In Adams v. General Motors Company (Case No. 12-2084), the Sixth Circuit rejected an ineligible retiree’s claim for reinstatement of erroneous benefit payments under her former employer’s pension plan. The retiree received benefit payments for twenty-one months before the plan administrator realized that she was ineligible for benefits under the plan and ceased further benefit … Continue Reading

Second Circuit: Deferential Standard Applies Without Notice To Participants & Reimbursement Claims Are Equitable Relief

Yesterday, the Second Circuit ruled on two important issues of note for ERISA plan sponsors and plan fiduciaries. In Thurber v. Aetna Life Insurance Co., 2013 WL 950704 (2d Cir. Mar. 13, 2013), the Court ruled that participants and beneficiaries are not required to be put on notice that: the plan fiduciary has reserved discretion to … Continue Reading
LexBlog

This website uses third party cookies, over which we have no control. To deactivate the use of third party advertising cookies, you should alter the settings in your browser.

OK