Martinez v. Beverly Hills Hotel & Bungalows Employee Benefit Trust Employee Welfare Plan

Good Law
538 F. App'x 778
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 19, 201310-56370, 11-57221California269 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Ana Martinez appeals from the district court’s order denying attorney’s fees in Case No. 2:09-cv-01222-SVW-PLA (Martinez I) and the court’s order upholding Defendant The Beverly Hills Hotel and Bungalows Employee Benefit Trust Employee Welfare Plan’s (the Plan administrator) decision to deny her benefits in Case No. 2:ll-cv-02304-SVW-PLA (Martinez II). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse and remand.

As an initial matter, Martinez’s decision not to immediately appeal the district court’s decision to remand in Martinez I does not waive her present challenge. That order was not appealable at the time. Banuelos v. Constr. Laborers’ Trust Funds for S. Cal., 382 F.3d 897, 903 (9th Cir.2004).

The district court abused its discretion by remanding the matter to the Plan administrator after correctly ruling that the Plan’s reasons for denying benefits were invalid. No factual determinations remained to be made; the administrator simply erred in denying Martinez benefits. The proper remedy under the circumstances was to order the payment of benefits then and there. Canseco v. Constr. Laborers Pension Trust for S. Cal., 93 F.3d 600, 609 (9th Cir.1996).…

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.