McDonald v. Western-Southern Life Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that reliance on the report of an independent physician was arbitrary and capricious where the reviewer “opined that [the claimant] could return to work, [but] he did not say what kind of work he could perform”
• finding that reliance on the report of an independent physician was arbitrary and capricious where the reviewer “opined that [the claimant] could return to work, [but] he did not say what kind of work he could preform”
• finding a denial of benefits to be arbitrary and capricious when premised on the report of an independent doctor whose initial opinion changed after “a telephone call from members of [the plan administrator]’s appeals committee”
• finding a denial of benefits to be arbitrary and capricious when premised on the report of an independent doctor whose initial opinion changed after “a telephone call from members of [the plan administrator]’s appeals committee”
• “The evidence presented in the administrative record did not support the denial of benefits when only [the adminis trator]’s physicians, who had not examined [the claimant], disagreed with the treating physicians.”
• “The evidence presented in the administrative record did not support the denial of benefits when only [the administrator]’s physicians, who had not examined [the claimant], disagreed with the treating physicians.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).