Marvin Pulvers v. First Unum 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.

• upholding denial of benefits despite “evidence in the record . . . that would have supported a contrary finding”
• upholding district court’s ruling that denial of benefits was not arbitrary and capricious where evidence in the record was sufficient to allow administrator to rule either way
• “[W]here the administrator imposes a standard not required by the plan’s provisions, or interprets the plan in a manner inconsistent with its plain words, ... [its] actions may well be found to be arbitrary and capricious.”
• “In order to trigger de novo review of an administrator’s decision when the plan itself grants discretion to the administrator, a plaintiff must show that ‘the administrator was in fact influenced by the conflict of interest.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).