On Behalf of McKennon Law Group PC | Nov 1, 2010 | Case Updates, Disability Insurance, Disability Insurance News, ERISA, ERISA - Abuse of Discretion, ERISA - De Novo Review, Firm News, Insurance Litigation Blog
The question of who has the burden of proof can often decide the outcome of litigation. Given its importance, it is common to see litigants attempt to shift that burden to the opposing side in order to secure a tactical advantage. Recently, in Muniz v. Amec...
On Behalf of McKennon Law Group PC | Oct 28, 2010 | Case Updates, Disability Insurance, Disability Insurance News, ERISA, ERISA - Abuse of Discretion, ERISA - De Novo Review, Firm News, Insurance Litigation Blog
Litigation pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) is rather unique. Unlike most cases, ERISA disputes are based on a limited scope of permissible evidence. The range of that scope is ultimately dependent on which standard of review is...
On Behalf of McKennon Law Group PC | Apr 29, 2010 | Case Updates, ERISA, ERISA - Abuse of Discretion, Firm News, News
The federal courts have for a long time struggled with how to apply the deferential standard of review to actions taken by ERISA plan administrators in light of the United States Supreme Court holding in Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, 489 U.S. 101 (1989)....
On Behalf of McKennon Law Group PC | Jan 14, 2010 | Case Updates, ERISA, ERISA - Abuse of Discretion, ERISA - Conflict of Interest, ERISA - Standard of Review, Firm News, Insurance Litigation Blog, News
Recently, in Montour v. Harford Life & Accident, 582 F.3d 933 (9th Cir. 2009), the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in one of its most important cases, adopted a new standard of reviewing ERISA abuse of discretion cases where the insurer has a conflict of...
On Behalf of McKennon Law Group PC | Jan 14, 2010 | Case Updates, Disability Insurance, Disability Insurance News, ERISA, ERISA - Abuse of Discretion, ERISA - Conflict of Interest, Firm News, Insurance Litigation Blog, News
The Ninth Circuit recently addressed, for the first time, whether the standard of review analysis for “top hat”ERISA plans is the same as for other ERISA plans. InSznewajs v. U.S. Bancorp Amended and Restated Supplemental Benefits Plan, 572 F.3d 727 (9th Cir. 2009),...
On Behalf of McKennon Law Group PC | Jan 14, 2010 | Case Updates, Disability Insurance, Disability Insurance News, ERISA, ERISA - Abuse of Discretion, ERISA - Conflict of Interest, Firm News, Insurance Litigation Blog, News
After the United States Supreme Court decided MetLife Ins. Co. v. Glenn in which the Court held that a reviewing court must consider the conflict of interest arising from the dual role of an insurer acting as a plan administrator and payor of plan benefits as a factor...
