Mary L. Schatz v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company, Mutual of Omaha

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “when the insurer is also the plan administrator, we have recognized something akin to a rebuttable presumption of a palpable conflict of interest”
• holding the claimant must offer evidence which gives rise to serious doubts as to whether the result reached was the product of an arbitrary decision or the plan administrator’s whim
• explaining that the circuit court uses the terms “abuse of discre- tion” and “arbitrary and capricious” interchangeably when evaluating ERISA cases
• explaining that the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit uses the terms “abuse of discretion” and “arbitrary and capricious” interchangeably when evaluating ERISA cases
• holding the claimant must offer evidence which gives rise to serious doubts as to whether the result reached was the product of an arbitrary decision or the plan administrator's whim
• finding that substantial evidence means “more than a scintilla but less than a preponderance”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).