Nolan

Nolan v. Heald College

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 13, 200907-15679California3,216 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

A. The Plan

In January 2002, Appellee Heald College purchased a group long-term disability insurance plan (the Plan) from MetLife. The Plan granted MetLife broad discretion to both interpret relevant Plan provisions and to determine eligibility for benefits. Specifically, the Plan provided that “MetLife in its discretion has authority to interpret the terms, conditions, and provisions of the entire contract. This includes the Group Policy, Certificate and any Amendments.” In addition, the Plan stated:

Discretionary Authority of Plan Administrator and Other Plan Fiduciaries 482 NOLAN v. HEALD COLLEGE In carrying out their respective responsibilities under the Plan, the Plan administrator and other Plan fidu- ciaries1 shall have discretionary authority to interpret the terms of the Plan and to determine eligibility for and entitlement to Plan benefits in accordance with the terms of the Plan. Any interpretation or determi- nation made pursuant to such discretionary authority shall be given full force and effect, unless it can be shown that the interpretation or determination was arbitrary and capricious.

(Footnote added).

B. The…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.