Emma Anderson v. Flexel, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a request for documents under § 104(b)(4) necessitates a response from an administrator when it gives the administrator \clear notice\ of the information sought
• holding that the plan administrator knew or should have known that a request for “any group life insurance that [the beneficiary] might have had” included the beneficiary designation forms and policy handbook
• recognizing in the context of an attorney's request under S 1024(b)(4) \the existence of the long-standing legal presumption that an attorney has authority to act on behalf of the person he\ purports to represent
• “[W]e simply recognize the existence of the longstanding legal presumption that an attorney has the authority to act on behalf of the person he represents.”
• “We have repeatedly stated that post-judg- ment motions cannot be used to raise arguments or legal the- ories that could have been and should have been brought be- fore judgment.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).