United States Supreme Court Employment Law Cases
All pending employment law cases - click here |
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. Glenn
(06-923)
ERISA: Effect on judicial review when administrator both determines
and pays claims under an ERISA plan
|
MetLife, an ERISA plan administrator, terminated
Glenn's disability benefits on the ground that she had improved to the point of
no longer being totally disabled. Glenn sued to recover her benefits. The 6th
Circuit noted that MetLife operated under an apparent conflict of
interests because MetLife both decides the claims and pays the claims. Although
the trial court upheld MetLife's denial of the claim, the 6th Circuit reviewed
the evidence and directed the trial court to reinstate Glenn's benefits.
Case below: Glenn
v. MetLife (6th Cir 09/01/2006)
Questions presented:
1. Whether the Sixth Circuit erred in
holding, in conflict with two other Circuits, that the fact that a claim
administrator of an ERISA plan also funds the plan benefits, without more,
constitutes a “conflict of interest” which must be weighed in a judicial
review of the administrator’s benefit determination under Firestone Tire
& Rubber v. Bruch, 489 U.S. 101 (1989)? [The Supreme Court did not grant certiorari as to the petitioner's second
question, and it is omitted.] [The Supreme Court added the following question:] 2. If an administrator that both determines and pays claims
under an ERISA plan is deemed to be operating under a conflict of interest, how
should that conflict be taken into account on judicial review of a discretionary
benefit determination?" Certiorari Documents:
Briefs on the merits:
Counsel:
|
|
Home
| MyLawMemo | Custom
Alerts | Newest Cases | Key
Word Search
|