Patrick L. Gallagher v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance Company

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that review was de novo because plan language did not give administrator discretion
• stating that use of a Dictionary job description is an acceptable reference when the description \involve[s] comparable duties\
• finding that plan’s use of DOT description was “objectively reasonable” in defining material duties where the description involved comparable duties to claimant’s actual job duties
• stating that use of a Dictionary job description is an acceptable reference when the description “involve[s] comparable duties”
• noting that discretionary authority is found when a claimant “must submit proof of his disability that is satisfactory to [the plan administrator]”
• determining that a plan administrator has no obligation to weigh the Social Security Administration's disability determination more favorably than other evidence when the social security standard of disability differs from the standard under the plan

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).