Good morning, ERISA Watchers! Just moments after last week’s newsletter went out, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its 9-0 decision in Intel Corp. Inv. Policy Comm. v. Sulyma, No. 18-1116, __S.Ct.__, 2020 WL 908881 (U.S. Feb. 26, 2020), a case involving allegations of imprudent investment of retirement plan assets. The court held that to meet the “actual knowledge” requirement to trigger ERISA’s three-year limitations period, a plaintiff must have become aware of the information; actual knowledge does not exist where a plaintiff receives disclosures with the information but does not read them or cannot recall reading them. The decision comes as no surprise where at the oral argument Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (my Shero) stated, “I must say, I don’t read all the mailings that I get about my investments.” The decision makes perfect sense. I mean, it’s 4 a.m., do you know what your investments are up to?
Continue Reading District Court Reduces Class Counsel Common Fund Fee Award Due to Attorney Misconduct
First Circuit Holds Denial of Accidental Death Benefits Due to Pre-existing Illnesses Was Not Abuse of Discretion
This week’s notable decision is Arruda v. Zurich Am. Ins. Co., No. 19-1247, __F.3d__, 2020 WL 880548 (1st Cir. Feb. 24, 2020), where the First Circuit parted from its sister circuits in declining to adopt a “substantial factor” test to the application of an exclusion in a life insurance policy where abuse of discretion review applies. In so doing, it reversed the district court’s entry of summary judgment to the beneficiary and directed entry of summary judgment to Zurich.
The case involves an unfortunate motor vehicle accident that resulted in the death of the insured, Joseph Arruda, who had named his wife, Plaintiff-Appellee Denise Arruda, as the beneficiary of any death benefits under his employer’s basic accident policy (“the Policy”) insured by Zurich. On the day of his death, Mr. Arruda was driving down a four-lane road on his way to a work event when his car crossed all lanes of traffic, collided with another car, hit the curb, rolled over, and landed on its wheels on the opposite side of the road. He was alive briefly following the accident but was pronounced dead at the scene.
Continue Reading First Circuit Holds Denial of Accidental Death Benefits Due to Pre-existing Illnesses Was Not Abuse of Discretion
Court Finds Collateral Estoppel Applies to Wit v. UBH Decision on Issue of Conflict of Interest in Residential Treatment Dispute
This week’s notable decision is Bain v. United Healthcare Inc., No. 15-CV-03305-EMC (N.D. Cal. Feb. 15, 2020), a case involving a dispute over residential treatment benefits. What’s notable about this decision, and a couple of other decisions picked up this past week, is the reverberation of the groundbreaking decision in Wit v. United Behavioral Health, No. 14-CV-02346-JCS, 2019 WL 1033730 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 5, 2019).
Continue Reading Court Finds Collateral Estoppel Applies to Wit v. UBH Decision on Issue of Conflict of Interest in Residential Treatment Dispute