Hoskins v. Bayer Corp. & Business Services Long Term Disability Plan

MEMORANDUM

Betty Hoskins (“Hoskins”) appeals the district court’s grant of judgment in favor of Bayer Corporation Disability Plans (“the Plan”) in her action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 , et seq., challenging the termination of her long-term disability benefits under the Plan. We affirm.

“We review de novo a district court’s choice and application of the standard of review to decisions by fiduciaries in ERISA cases.” Abatie v. Alta Health & Life Ins. Co., 458 F.3d 955, 962 (9th Cir. 2006)(en banc). In this case, an abuse of discretion standard of review applies because the Plan grants the Plan administrator, Bayer Corporation (“Bayer”), discretionary authority to determine eligibility for benefits and construe terms of the Plan, and Bayer did not commit any serious procedural irregularities that would trigger de novo review. See id. at 963, 971-72 . The degree of deference we accord Bayer’s decision is impacted by the fact that Bayer operates under a conflict of interest, see id. at 965-69 , but it is not necessary to thoroughly analyze the importance of this conflict because Bayer’s decision to terminate benefits should…