Pannebecker v. Liberty Life Assur. Co. of Boston

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because the 4 policy did not require consideration of salary, the claims administrator did not abuse its discretion 5 in failing to consider the claimant’s most recent salary
• reiterating that the “language of the ‘any occupation’ standard is not demanding” (quoting McKenzie v. Gen. Tel. Co. of Cal., 41 F.3d 1310, 1317 (9th Cir. 1994)
• “[I]f an administrator terminates continuing benefits as a result of arbitrary and capricious conduct, the claimant should continue receiving benefits until the administrator properly applies the plan’s provisions.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).