Olive
Olive v. American Express Long Term Disability Benefit Plan
Opinion
Opinion
Pregerson, J.
ORDER GRANTING THE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION DETERMINING THAT THE STANDARD OF REVIEW IS DE NOVO
This matter comes before the Court on the plaintiffs motion for an order determining that the standard of review in the instant ERISA case is de novo. After reviewing and considering the materials submitted by the parties and hearing oral argument, the Court grants the motion.
BACKGROUND
On March 16, 2001, the plaintiff Ruth A. Olive filed a complaint against the defendants American Express Long Term Disability Benefit Plan and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”) (collectively the “defendants”). The action arises under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. (“ERISA”). The plaintiff alleges (1) benefits due under an ERISA plan pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (A)(1)(B); and (2) restitution and restoration for breach of fiduciary duty under ERISA pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1104 (a)(l)(A)(I). (First Am. Compl. at 1.)
The plaintiff was employed by American Express Corporation (“American Express”). As an employee, the plaintiff became a participant in American Express’s employee welfare benefits plan (the “Plan”). The Plan is administered by Met-Life.…