Lake v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that ambiguous language in one portion of an ERISA plan was resolved by reference to the clear and unambiguous language in another portion of the plan
• finding that ambiguous language in one portion of an ERISA plan was resolved by reference to the clear and unambiguous language in another portion of the plan
• noting that “[pjlaintiffs would not be entitled to recover substantive damages ... because violations of the procedural sections ... do not give rise to claims for substantive damages”
• resolving ambiguity in summary plan description by referring to clarifying language in plan documents
• language granting insurer authority to “make all decisions on claims” and vesting “management and control of the operation and administration of claims procedures” in insurer sufficient to grant discretionary authority to defendant to determine who is eligible for benefits

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).