Supplemental Evidence – Long Term Disability ERISA

A reviewing court has discretion to consider supplemental evidence presented by the parties in the context of an ERISA LTD claim.  Viera v. Life Ins. Co. of North American, 642 F.3d 407, 418 (3rd Cir. 2011).  In particular, a party may supplement the record with evidence concerning a plan’s funding mechanism to show a conflict of interest.  Kosiba v. Merck & Co., 384 F.3d 58 (3rd Cir. 2004).   Interestingly, in the context of a conflict of interest, Court’s have noted “structural conflicts of interest”; but held that disposition of the matter turns on “whether a reasonable basis existed for the administrator’s benefits decision.”  Blankenship v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 644 F.3d 1350 (11th Cir. 2011).   In other words, some Courts find that although the conflict of interest must be considered, it does not alter the basic analysis of an ERISA LTD claim.  Id.  In my opinion, the fact of a conflict of interest should be important, especially on “borderline” claims.  


About tngainjurylawyer
Serious Injury Lawyer in Tennessee and Georgia.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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: