George W. Mitchell v. Eastman Kodak Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that under arbitrary and capricious review the record consists of that evidence before the administrator when he made the decision subject to review
• holding that a reviewing court must look only at the evidence that was before the administrator
• holding that under the arbitrary and capricious standard of review the ‘whole’ record consists of that evidence that was before the administrator when it made the decision being reviewed
• holding that the relevant record on appeal is the evidence before the reviewing body
• holding that the’ relevant record on appeal is the evidence before the reviewing body
• holding that under the facts of that case, it was arbitrary and capricious for a plan to require objective evidence of the etiology of CFS, when it is widely recognized that there is no conclusive laboratory test for CFS

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).