Nugent v. Pippin

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that appellant’s argument not raised during a bench trial or in proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law is waived on appeal
• holding that a district court’s “factual findings [that] turn on . . . the weighing of conflicting evidence during a bench trial . . . are entitled to even greater deference”
• noting that, in “review[ing] judgments stemming from a bench trial”, we review factual findings for clear error
• noting that the standard of review depends on whether the plan gives the administrator the discretionary authority to make coverage decisions
• noting that “the administration of ERISA plans should be left to plan fiduciaries, not federal courts”
• permitting introduction of evidence known to the administrator at the time it rendered its decision

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).