Sebo

Sebo v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

Good Law
22 F. App'x 730
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 1, 2001No. 00-55765; D.C. No. CV-99-10770-HLHCalifornia420 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Appellant (Sebo) appeals from a judgment of the district court in favor of Ap-pellee (Metropolitan). The judgment upheld Metropolitan’s termination of benefits under Metropolitan’s long term disability plan (the Plan), which is governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 , et. seq. (ERISA). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. *731 § 1291 . We affirm the judgment of the district court.

We review de novo the district court’s choice of the standard of review, and its application of that standard to decisions by fiduciaries in the ERISA context. Taft v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y, 9 F.3d 1469 , 1471 (9th Cir.1993). Where an ERISA plan confers discretion on the administrator to determine eligibility for benefits, the district court ordinarily reviews the administrator’s determinations for abuse of discretion. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, 489 U.S. 101, 115 , 109 S.Ct. 948 , 103 L.Ed.2d 80 (1989). When a plan administrator pays claims out of its own assets, the affected beneficiary is given the opportunity to produce material probative evidence tending to show that the fiduciary’s self interest caused a breach of duty to…

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.