John Lloyd Dunn, II v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

How courts have described this case

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

• finding the arbitrary-and-capricious standard appropriate where the plan at issue contained a term giving “full discretion and authority to determine eligibility for benefits and to construe and interpret all terms and provisions of the [p]olicy.”
• collecting cases and noting that circuit courts had “uniformly concluded” that the 2002 regulation did not require the claims administrator to produce documents developed or considered during the administrative appeal before rendering its final determination

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).