Schwalm v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of America

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that although the administrative record includes contradictory evidence, \the evidence suggesting that Schwalm suffered from a continuing disability is not so one-sided that the decision to deny benefits can be considered arbitrary or capricious\
• concluding that although the administrative record includes contradictory evidence, “the evidence suggesting that Schwalm suffered from a continuing disability is not so one-sided that the decision to deny benefits can be considered arbitrary or capricious”
• concluding plan administrator and payor “thorough[ly] review[ed] the record” such that there was “no indication that the review was improperly influenced by the inherent conflict of interest
• upholding denial of disability benefits despite “some contradictory evidence” where the Social Security Administration also denied benefits under the Social Security Act
• interpreting Glenn and finding no conflict of interest where the administrator “provided a thorough review of the record and there [was] no indication that the review was improperly influenced by the inherent conflict of interest”
• interpreting Glenn and finding no conflict of interest where the administrator “provided a thorough review of the record and there [was] no indication that the review was improperly influenced by the inherent conflict of interest”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).