Susan Defelice v. American International Life Assurance Company of New York

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a trial court may consult with an advisory jury \so long as the court retains the ultimate responsibility for findings of fact and conclusions\
• finding that the administrator of an unfunded plan had a conflict of interest by virtue of her employment with the sponsoring company
• holding good cause shown where there was “[a] demonstrated conflict of interest in the administrative reviewing body”
• noting that even when a district court applies de novo review, “the review is ... limited to the record in front of the claims administrator unless the district court finds good cause to consider additional evidence”
• explaining that actions for benefits under ERISA are “equitable” for Seventh Amendment purposes because they 241 (2d Cir. 2002), that case was decided before Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 569 (2007
• finding good cause where conflicted administrator had no established criteria for determining claims appeals and a practice of destroying records immediately after hearings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).