Last week was a slow one for the federal courts, as the steady drip of turkey-produced tryptophan prevented them from providing us with a full complement of the ERISA-related decisions we all know and love. As a result, there was
Johnson v. Parker-Hannifin Corp., No. 24-3014, __ F.4th __, 2024 WL 4834717 (6th Cir. Nov. 20, 2024) (Before Circuit Judges Moore, Murphy, and Bloomekatz)
We’re bringing you an abbreviated Your ERISA Watch this week because of the holiday. In
McEachin v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co., No. 24-1071, __ F.4th __, 2024 WL 4759527 (6th Cir. Nov. 13, 2024) (Before Circuit Judges Sutton, Larsen, and Murphy)
Most ERISA-governed long-term disability benefit plans have limitations for various types of
Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Valois, No. 23-3286, __ F. App’x __, 2024 WL 4678055 (9th Cir. Nov. 5, 2024) (Before Circuit Judges Owens, Sung, and Sanchez)
One of ERISA’s goals is to simplify benefit plan administration
Romano v. John Hancock Life Ins. Co. U.S., No. 22-12366, __ F. 4th __, 2024 WL 4614701 (11th Cir. Oct. 30, 2024) (Before Circuit Judges Jordan, Brasher, and Abudu)
The earliest usage of the word “windfall” traces back to
Fleming v. Kellogg Co., No. 23-1966, __ F. App’x __, 2024 WL 4534677 (6th Cir. Oct. 21, 2024) (Before Circuit Judges Gibbons, Kethledge, and Davis)
It’s been a few months since we last covered the effective vindication doctrine here
This was one of the lightest weeks in recent memory for ERISA decisions in the federal courts, with only a handful of cases reported. Have the courts finally figured out all of ERISA’s issues? Have benefit plans simply decided to
The federal courts took a breather this week after the Civil Justice Reform Act reporting period expired on September 30, with a sharp drop in the number of ERISA-related cases reported. None of the decisions that were reported were particularly
M.S. v. Premera Blue Cross, No. 22-4056, __ F. 4th __, 2024 WL 4356319 (10th Cir. Oct. 1, 2024) (Before Circuit Judges Hartz, Moritz, and Rossman)
For the second week in a row, Article III standing proves too high a
Knudsen v. MetLife Grp., Inc., No. 23-2420, __ F.4th __, 2024 WL 4282967 (3d Cir. Sept. 25, 2024) (Before Circuit Judges Restrepo, Freeman, and McKee)
Under the “case or controversy” requirement of Article III of the United States Constitution,