Search : ERISA
Number of summaries found: 1154
Search For More Summaries
| Court: | U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals |
| Topic: | Administrative Law, ERISA, Government Law, Labor & Employment Law |
| Title: | Battoni v. IBEW Local Union No. 102 Employee Pension Plan |
| Date: | 02/05/10 |
| Case Number: | 08-3743 |
| Summary: | In plaintiffs' ERISA action challenging an amendment to their welfare plan as an unlawful cutback of their accrued benefits under their pension plan, the judgment of the district court in favor of the plaintiffs is affirmed as the amendment violated the ERISA's Anti-Cutback rule, 29 U.S.C. section 1054(g), by constructively amending the pension plan in a manner that decreased an accrued benefit under that plan. |
| Court: | U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals |
| Topic: | Administrative Law, ERISA, Government Law, Labor & Employment Law |
| Title: | Balmert v. Reliance Standard Life Ins., Co. |
| Date: | 02/05/10 |
| Case Number: | 08-4433 |
| Summary: | In plaintiff's ERISA action, a decision upholding the benefits determination of defendant-insurance company denying plaintiff's claim for long-term disability benefits is affirmed as plaintiff received a full and fair review of her claim and defendant's benefits determination was not arbitrary and capricious as it was supported by substantial evidence. |
| Court: | U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals |
| Topic: | Banking Law, ERISA, Probate, Trusts & Estates, Tax Law |
| Title: | Charles Schwab & Co. v. Debickero |
| Date: | 01/22/10 |
| Case Number: | 07-15261 |
| Summary: | In an interpleader action by a bank seeking to determine the ownership of an IRA account held by decedent, summary judgment for the named beneficiaries of the IRA is affirmed where: 1) the surviving spouse protections in ERISA did not apply to the IRA even though some of the funds originated from an ERISA-protected pension plan, and 2) the Internal Revenue Code also did not impose automatic surviving spouse rights on IRAs similar to those protections afforded under ERISA. |
| Court: | U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals |
| Topic: | Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, ERISA, Health Law, Labor & Employment Law |
| Title: | Richards v. Hewlett-Packard Corp. |
| Date: | 01/19/10 |
| Case Number: | 08-2538 |
| Summary: | In plaintiff's ERISA action, district court's summary judgment ruling upholding the termination of plaintiff's long-term disability benefits by defendant-administrator is affirmed as, the dispute in this case is not whether plaintiff is afflicted with fibromyalgia or chronic fatigue immune dysfunction, but that he has not met his burden of showing that these conditions rendered him unable to perform any job for which he is qualified. |
| Court: | U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals |
| Topic: | Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, ERISA, Health Law, Labor & Employment Law |
| Title: | Cusson v. Liberty Life Assurance Co. of Boston |
| Date: | 01/14/10 |
| Case Number: | 08-2381 |
| Summary: | In plaintiff's ERISA action against defendants for terminating her disability benefits, summary judgment in favor of defendants is affirmed where: 1) defendant's decision was not improperly influenced by its structural conflict of interest; 2) defendant's ultimate conclusion was not an abuse of discretion as it was supported by the totality of the evidence; and 3) defendant's counterclaim is an equitable claim and is allowed under 29 U.S.C. section 1132(a)(3). |
| Court: | U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals |
| Topic: | Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, ERISA, Labor & Employment Law |
| Title: | Line Constr. Benefit Fund v. Allied Elec. Contractors, Inc. |
| Date: | 01/08/10 |
| Case Number: | 09-1546 |
| Summary: | In an ERISA action by a multiemployer employee welfare fund (Plan) against an employer for deficient contributions, summary judgment in favor of the Plan is affirmed where: 1) the Plan properly brought suit under ERISA as Congress has provided that plans can sue and be sued and that fiduciaries may enforce substantive rights under 29 U.S.C. section 1132(e); and 2) the employer is liable for the deficient contributions for July, August, and December 2006, and January and February 2007, as it treats as irrelevant the fact that its course of conduct - making payments precisely in accordance with the 2005 collective bargaining agreement from the start - demonstrates its assent to that agreement. |
| Court: | U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals |
| Topic: | ERISA, Health Law, Injury And Tort Law, Insurance Law, Labor & Employment Law |
| Title: | Capone v. Aetna Life Ins. Co. |
| Date: | 01/05/10 |
| Case Number: | 09-10222 |
| Summary: | In an ERISA action seeking disability benefits from an insurer, summary judgment for defendant is reversed where: 1) even if plaintiff's dive off a dock into shallow water was intentional, if there was an intervening unexpected act, plaintiff would be entitled to recover under the policy; and 2) it was unreasonable to conclude that plaintiff's intoxication caused his injury. |
| Court: | U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals |
| Topic: | Civil Procedure, Contracts, ERISA, Health Law, Injury And Tort Law |
| Title: | Connecticut State Dental Ass'n. v. Anthem Health Plans, Inc. |
| Date: | 12/30/09 |
| Case Number: | 08-15268 |
| Summary: | In an action by dentists claiming that defendant health insurer employed a number of practices, such as "improper downcoding" and "improper bundling," as a means of underpaying participating dentists for services they performed, denial of plaintiffs' motion to remand the action is affirmed in part where plaintiffs' allegations implicated not only the "rate of payment" under their provider agreements, but also the "right of payment." However, the order is reversed in part where a trade association did not have standing to sue under ERISA and thus ERISA did not completely preempt plaintiff-association's claims. |
| Court: | U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals |
| Topic: | Administrative Law, ERISA, Evidence, Health Law, Insurance Law, Labor & Employment Law |
| Title: | Majeski v. Metro. Life Ins. Co. |
| Date: | 12/29/09 |
| Case Number: | 09-1930 |
| Summary: | In plaintiff-employee's ERISA action against defendant-employer for denying her claim for short-term disability benefits, summary judgment in favor of the defendant is vacated and remanded as a plan administrator's procedures are not reasonable if its determination ignores, without explanation, substantial evidence that the claimant has submitted that addresses what the plan itself has defined as the ultimate issue of whether plaintiff's functional limitations were objectively documented. |
| Court: | U.S. 10th Circuit Court of Appeals |
| Topic: | Administrative Law, ERISA, Health Law, Insurance Law |
| Title: | Hancock v. Metro. Life Ins. Co. |
| Date: | 12/29/09 |
| Case Number: | 08-4161 |
| Summary: | In an action for disability benefits under ERISA, summary judgment for defendant-insurer is affirmed where: 1) the application of Utah Admin. Code section 590-218 to the benefits plan was expressly preempted by ERISA; 2) defendant's benefit-denial letter could not have violated 29 C.F.R. section 2560.503-1(g) because that provision applied only to denials of benefits, not denials of appeals; and 3) defendant did not deny plaintiff a full and fair review. |