Gertjejansen
Gertjejansen v. Kemper Insurance Companies, Inc.
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Linda Gertjejansen (“Gertjejansen”) appeals the district court’s order granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. The district court correctly upheld defendant’s decision to deny Gertjejansen’s claim for permanent disability benefits. The parties are familiar with the facts and we do not repeat them here.
We review the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo. Qwest Commc’ns, Inc. v. City of Berkeley, 433 F.3d 1253 , 1256 (9th Cir.2006). We review a district court’s interpretation of an ERISA insurance policy’s language de novo and its findings of fact for clear error. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Parker, 436 F.3d 1109, 1113 (9th Cir.2006).
Lumbermens contends that the district court incorrectly reviewed the administrator’s decision to deny benefits de novo instead of for an abuse of discretion. 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). Although Lumbermens has shown that the Summary Plan Description (“SPD”)…