Jett v. Linville

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that “the principle that ’sandbagging’ claimants with new rationales is impermissible, given that the ‘need for clear notice pervades the ERISA regulatory structure,’ is well- established” (citation omitted)
• “[R]emand is particularly appropriate, although not required, in a case like this one; a substantive remedy is poorly tailored to a procedural violation.”
• “[T]he principle that ‘sandbagging’ claimants with new rationales is impermissible, given that the ‘need for clear notice pervades the ERISA regulatory structure,’ is well-established.” (quoting Bard, 471 F.3d at 237, 244)
• reporting on November 18, 2017 that Chambers is “slowly improving”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).