Niwa v. Sprouse Reitz Stores, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding “a remand of an ERISA action seeking benefits is inappropriate where the difficulty is not that the administrative record was incomplete but that a denial of benefits based on the record was unreasonable.”
• requiring evidence of a treatment's superior effectiveness was arbitrary and capricious when the plan only required evidence of a treatment's effectiveness
• disregarding extra-record testimony from defendant's medical experts, but relying on the testimony from defendant's medical policy director that explained how defendant determined that a treatment was experimental and investigational
• “[A] remand of an ERISA action seeking benefits is inappropriate where the difficulty is not that the administrative record was incomplete but that a denial of benefits based on the record was unreasonable.”
• not finding good cause where the extra-record evidence \appears to be aimed at bolstering [the party's] legal position and not at providing a fuller review of [the] claim\
• \[A] remand of an ERISA action seeking benefits is inappropriate where the difficulty is not that the administrative record was incomplete but that a denial of benefits based on the record was unreasonable.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).