Conflict of Interest

According to a recent district court decision,

Raising the spectre of a conflict of interest is insufficient for the Court to find the administrator’s decision to be arbitrary and capricious. Absent evidence that the administrator’s decision was motivated by its dual role, the Court will give only slight weight to the conflict of interest when reviewing the administrator’s decision. Curry v. Eaton Corp., 400 F. App’x 51, 58-59 (6th Cir. 2010)(applying “ordinary” arbitrary and capricious review where no evidence was provided that the administrator’s decision was motivated by its alleged conflict of interest); Hayden v. Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. Flexible Benefits Program, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 106497, 2012 WL 3109496 (W.D. Ky. July 31, 2012) (giving only slight weight to a structural conflict of interest where neither party had presented evidence).

Maynard v. The Prudential Ins. Co. of America, 2013 U.S.Dist. Lexis 159648 (N.D. Ohio, 11/7/2013)

Advertisements

About tngadisabilitylawyer
Disability Lawyer in Tennessee and Georgia.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: