Federal Case

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that denying fees to a beneficiary who prevails against a large plan would \significantly undermine the ability of potential beneficiaries to protect their rights in federal court\
• noting that denying fees to a beneficiary who prevails against a large plan would “significantly undermine the ability of potential beneficiaries to protect their rights in federal court”
• defining insanity to include someone who suffers from “an ‘insane’ impulse that so overwhelms the will or rational thought that the individual is unable to resist”
• overruled on other grounds by Quesinberry v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 987 F.2d 1017, 1030 (4th Cir. 1993)
• all applying de novo review when the plan does not grant discretion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).