Donna J. Farfalla v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “an ERISA plan administrator or fiduciary generally is not bound by an SSA determination that a plan participant is disabled, even when the plan’s definition of disabled is similar to the definition the SSA applied”
• finding plan’s denial reasonable where there was no evidence that plaintiffs condition met plan definition, and where there was actually evidence to the contrary
• finding the plan exhibited ample reflection and judgment before denying claim where, among other facts, it sought independent physician review of plaintiffs records and nothing in records demonstrated plaintiff was entitled to benefits
• “[T]he purpose of the Plan is to benefit all covered employees, a purpose that is not furthered by paying an uncovered claim.”
• “[A]n ERISA plan administrator or fiduciary generally is not bound by an SSA determination that a plan participant is disabled, even when the plan’s definition of disabled is similar to the definition the SSA applied.”
• “[A]n ERISA plan administrator or fiduciary generally is not bound by an SSA determination that a plan participant is disabled, even when the plan’s definition of disabled is similar to the definition the SSA applied.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).