Brian King has an interesting post over at his ERISA Law Blog, concerning my recent suggestion that the Supreme Court was poised to shift the currents of the river that is the law of ERISA. Brian’s take? Ain’t happening, although in truth Brian’s point is a little more subtle than that, and is
Standard of Review
Is the Supreme Court Setting Out To Alter the Law of ERISA?
By Stephen Rosenberg on
Posted in Standard of Review
Conventional wisdom holds that the Supreme Court set out last term to change the direction of patent law, and did so. Are they out to do the same thing now with the law of ERISA? I think so. They already have LaRue up on their plate, a case I have said will result in a…
When Does Plan Language Mandate De Novo Review?
By Stephen Rosenberg on
Posted in Long Term Disability Benefits, Standard of Review
I wanted to take a moment over the next couple of posts to return to a couple of cases from earlier this month that are worth a look and a comment, but that I haven’t had a chance to talk about yet. One of them is a decision by Judge Lindsay of the United States…
Still More on Structural Conflicts of Interest
Day 3 of my discussion of the First Circuit’s recent ruling concerning structural conflicts of interest and their impact on claims for benefits under ERISA: Workplace Prof blog has his take, and quotes from others, here, and one of my favorite, quirkier, law blogs, Appellate Law & Practice, has its take here.
A Survey of All the Circuits on the Effect on the Standard of Review of Structural Conflicts of Interest
One of the things lawyers learn early in their careers is that the time it takes to research a particular issue can be reduced dramatically by finding a good published decision out of one of the better federal courts on the issue; such an opinion will often include an excellent synopsis, at a minimum, of…
Current First Circuit Thinking on Structural Conflicts of Interest
Interesting decision out of the First Circuit yesterday, in the case of Denmark v. Liberty Life Assurance Company, that focused on the proper standard of review to apply in cases in which the administrator both decides the claim for benefits and is also the party that will have to pay the benefits if the…
Mike Webster, the NFL and ERISA
By Stephen Rosenberg on
They say that professional football is far and away the most successful entertainment business – let alone sports league – in the country, but behind the scenes all is not tea and roses, quite clearly. Anyone who follows the sport knows the physical toll it takes on many of its best players, and a dark…
Summary Plan Descriptions and Grants of Discretion
Here is an interesting post concerning a recent decision from the Second Circuit on the impact – there is apparently none in that circuit, given this post and the Second Circuit decision, Tocker v. Phillip Morris Companies, discussed in the post – of an administrator reserving discretion in determining claims for benefits only in the…
The Supreme Court, Abatie and Conflicts of Interest
I have written extensively before – including both here and here -about Abatie v. Alta Health, the Ninth Circuit’s relatively recent decision revising that circuit’s approach to structural conflicts of interest and the effect such conflicts should have on the standard of review in denial of benefit cases. The Ninth Circuit’s new rule, I…
Preemption, Appellate Review and Plan Interpretation in the First Circuit
By Stephen Rosenberg on
The First Circuit released its most recent ERISA decision, Carrasquillo v. Pharmacia Corp., a few days ago. Of interest in the decision, the court notes the standards that the appellate court should apply in reviewing a district court’s entry of summary judgment when the arbitrary and capricious standard applies. The court reiterated that while…