Skip to main content
· 8/6/2003

Paul F. McElroy v. Smithkline Beecham Health & Welfare Benefits Trust Plan for U.S. Employees Smithkline Beecham Unum Provident Corporation

Citations

  • 340 F.3d 139
  • 30 Employee Benefits Cas. (BNA) 2677
  • 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 16557
  • 2003 WL 21887236

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the following text conferred discretion: The administrator “re- serves the absolute right to interpret” plan provisions and “to make determinations of facts and eligibility for benefits, and to decide any dispute that may arise.”
  • “Because the language of the .Plan is equivocal, the plan administrator was authorized to interpret it, and we must defer to this interpretation unless it is arbitrary or capricious.”
  • “Clearly, the ‘documents and instruments governing the plan’ do not necessarily include all relevant documents and, in particular, do not necessarily include the plaintiff’s claim file.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Scirica, Sloviter, Nygaard

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.