ERISA Standard of Review

Back to Insights

Discretionary Clauses and Choice of Law in ERISA Cases

The standard of judicial review utilized in cases brought under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) is critical and may even be outcome-determinative. The parties often vehemently assert their positions in litigation, with the plaintiffs strenuously claiming the right to a de novo standard of judicial review, while the defendants argue just as forcefully for a deferential standard.

7th Circuit Hears Oral Argument on Discretionary Clause Ban

On December 1, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals heard oral argument in the case of Mary C. Fontaine v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company.  The issue before the court was whether an Illinois insurance regulation banning discretionary clauses in health and disability insurance policies survives ERISA preemption claims.  The lower court ruled in Fontaine’s favor. […]

Can a law banning discretionary clauses apply to an event occurring prior to the legislative enactment?

In Cerone v. Reliance Standard Life Ins.Co., 2014 U.S.Dist.LEXIS 46529 (S.D.Cal. March 28, 2014), after the plaintiff’s accidental death claim based on the death of her husband was denied and her appeal exhausted, Debra Cerone filed suit against Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company. The issue decided in this opinion was whether the de novo or abuse of discretion standard of review applied.

How lenient is the ERISA arbitrary and capricious standard of review in disability insurance cases?

From time to time we comment on court opinions relevant to disability insurance and ERISA litigation – Gerhardt v. Liberty Life Assur.Co. of Boston, 2013 U.S.App.LEXIS 23912 (8th Cir. November 29, 2013)(Issue: Independent Medical Examinations; Transferable skills analysis). Lisa Gerhardt, a nurse, applied for disability benefits from her employer’s group long-term disability insurance company in […]