Although lawsuits challenging employee benefit denials under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) are brought as “civil actions” in accordance with the United States Code, the manner in which such cases are adjudicated deviates from the norm according to a recent article authored by Mark DeBofsky, “A Critical Appraisal of the Current State of ERISA Civil Procedure – An Examination of How Courts Treat “Civil Actions” Brought Under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.” (Chicago-Kent Employee Rights and Employment Policy Journal -18 Empl. Rts. and Empl. Pol. J. 203 (2014)).

Despite the Supreme Court’s delineation of what the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Congress mean when a statute authorizes an aggrieved party to bring a “civil action,” ERISA court proceedings have taken on the characteristics of litigation involving federal administrative agency determinations.

The article examines how ERISA pretrial proceedings, summary judgment, and even trials markedly differ from the norm. Despite well-defined rules that Congress intended to apply to all “civil actions,” the procedures followed in ERISA cases lack statutory support and may even raise due process and other Constitutional concerns.

Despite the complexity of the civil procedure issues discussed in the article, the implications are enormous since the scope of ERISA affects health insurance, disability and life insurance, as well as retirement benefits.It is undeniable that the ability of employees to enforce their right to receive promised benefits are issues of paramount concern to all. 

Related Articles

Severance Pact Forecloses Right To Pursue Disability Claim Later

Severance Pact Forecloses Right To Pursue Disability Claim Later

Lawyers who represent employees in severance negotiations should be aware and take heed of the recent New York federal court ruling in Schuyler v. Sun Life Assurance Co., 2023 WL 2388757 (S.D. N.Y., March 7, 2023). That case illustrated a dangerous pitfall that may unwittingly result in unintended unfortunate consequences based on the court’s finding that an employee’s release of her employer also waived the employee’s right to sue her disability insurer. […]

The Important Role Of Contra Proferentem In ERISA Cases

The Important Role Of Contra Proferentem In ERISA Cases

The outcome of Employee Retirement Income Security Act cases often turns on how courts interpret the meaning of specific benefit plan terms. The recently decided case of Stein v. Paul Revere Life Insurance Company, issued by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on March 16, illustrates what happens when plan terms are unclear and can have different meanings. […]

Courts Should Follow 8th Circ. On ERISA Procedure Rules

There is no provision in the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 mandating that claimants must exhaust internal appeals as a precondition to filing a lawsuit to challenge a claim denial. Nonetheless, most courts have required claimants to exhaust prelitigation appeals before their cases may be heard in court. […]