LaMarco
LaMarco v. CIGNA Corp.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Karen LaMarco appeals the district court’s dismissal, following a bench trial, of her action under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001-1461 , seeking residual partial benefits, as well as the district court’s denial of her motion for new trial. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm in part and dismiss in part as moot.
The district court’s finding that La-Marco is able to work in “any occupation” in which she might reasonably be expected to engage given her physical and mental capacity is not clearly erroneous. See Deegan v. Continental Cas. Co., 167 F.3d 502 , 506, 509 (9th Cir.1999) (standard of review). None of LaMarco’s medical records states that she is unable to work, and there is evidence in the record that she had been working part time and exercising regularly. LaMarco was given a “full and fair review” by the plan administrator, including two requests that she submit any evidence that might refute the administrator’s finding that she is not totally disabled.
Nor did the district court abuse its discretion in denying LaMarco’s motion for new trial. While the district court may direct submission of…