A few weeks ago one of the notable decisions out of the Eastern District of Tennessee, Jordan v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company, 2018 WL 543041 (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 24, 2018), held that the claimant’s failure to file her ERISA lawsuit for benefits upon the administrator’s failure to make a decision on her appeal within 45 days, and her continued pursuit of administrative remedies thereafter, required her to “pursue the administrative pathway to its end.”  

This week’s notable decision out of the Seventh Circuit, Dragus v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co., No. 17-1752, __F.3d__, 2018 WL 851164 (7th Cir. Feb. 14, 2018), is the same song to a different beat.  In Dragus, the Seventh Circuit held that Dragus waived the argument that Reliance Standard’s failure to render a timely decision on her claim compelled de novo review simply because she pursued administrative review through an appeal rather than pursued available remedies when the issue arose (i.e. immediately file a lawsuit).  On the merits of the case, the court determined that Reliance Standard’s decision was not arbitrary and capricious, where it relied on four independent physicians who did an “unbiased investigation.”  [Query: Is that really possible?].  Additionally, the court held that Plaintiff was not entitled to supplement the claim record with the Social Security Administration’s decision finding that Dragus is disabled from any gainful employment.
Continue Reading In the Seventh Circuit, File Suit Immediately or Lose De Novo Review

This week’s notable decision is Laborers’ Pension Fund v. Miscevic, No. 17-2022, __F.3d__, 2018 WL 578775 (7th Cir. Jan. 29, 2018).  In this case, Zeljko Miscevic worked as a union laborer and earned a vested pension benefit from the Laborers’ Pension Fund (the “Fund”), to be paid upon his retirement as a monthly annuity for his life.  Prior to his death, he was married to Anka Miscevic, and they had a 13-year old daughter together.  It is undisputed that Anka killed Zeljko at their home, but she was found not guilty of first degree murder by reason of insanity.  Anka claimed entitlement to a Surviving Spouse Pension.  The child’s estate argued that Anka was barred from recovering from the Fund by the Illinois slayer statute.  
Continue Reading In Matter of First Impression, Seventh Circuit Rules that ERISA Does Not Preempt the Illinois Slayer Statute

Follow me to Tennessee!  This week’s notable decisions are far apart on the spectrum, yet more similar than you might think, and not just because they’re both out of Tennessee and involve Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company.  Let’s start with the bad/bizarre (for Claimants):  Jordan v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company, No. 1:16-CV-23, 2018 WL 543041 (E.D. Tenn. Jan. 24, 2018). Jordan filed a lawsuit seeking long-term disability benefits after Reliance Standard failed to make a timely decision on her appeal.  Reliance Standard’s decision was due on December 18, 2015 (45 days following the appeal submission) but Jordan did not file suit until February 5, 2016 (more than 90 days following the appeal submission).  In litigation, Reliance Standard argued that Jordan failed to exhaust her administrative remedies. 
Continue Reading Play or Pay – Claimants and Administrators Must See the Administrative Process Through