Montour v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that failing to conduct in person medical evaluations “raises questions about the thoroughness and accuracy of the benefits determination....”
• holding that “not distinguishing the SSA’s contrary conclusion may indicate a failure to consider relevant evidence.”
• holding that a “court must consider numerous case-specific factors, including the administrator’s conflict of interest, and reach a decision as to whether discretion has been abused by weighing and balancing those factors together.”
• stating that the extent of a conflict of interest affects its weight in the overall analysis of whether an abuse of discretion occurred
• holding that paper review deserves less weight than an independent examination
• holding administrator abused its discretion in terminating long-term disability benefits to claimant who suffered from acute stress disorder, and back and knee impairments

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).