Love v. National City Corp. Welfare Benefits Plan

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 plan acted arbitrarily when an insurer \did not explain why it chose to discount the near-unanimous opinions of [Plaintiff's] treating physicians\
• holding that an administrator need not address each piece of evidence
• reversing termination of disability benefits where plan administrator failed to explain why it “chose to discredit the evaluations and conclusions of [claimant’s] treating physicians”
• remanding for further consideration even though the decision to terminate benefits was arbitrary and capricious
• finding denial arbitrary and capricious where denial letters failed to “explain[] why the reviewer chose to discredit the evaluations and conclusions of [the claimant’s] treating physicians” (emphasis in original)
• noting also that “SSA determinations are often instructive, but they are not determinative”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).