Legal Opinion
Conkright v. Frommert
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided April 21, 2010No. 08-810PublishedCited by 296 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Roberts
People make mistakes. Even administrators of ERISA plans. That should come as no surprise, given that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 is “an enormously complex and detailed statute,” Mertens v. Hewitt Associates, 508 U. S. 248, 262 (1998), and the plans that administrators must construe can be lengthy and complicated. (The one at issue here runs to 81 pages, with 139 sections.) We held in Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Bruch, 489 U. S. 101 (1989), that an ERISA plan administrator with discretionary authority to interpret a plan is entitled to deference in exercising that…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Pilot Life Insurance v. DedeauxSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Aetna Health Inc. v. DavilaSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. GlennSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by296 opinions
- Heimeshoff v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Salomaa v. Honda Long Term Disability PlanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Blankenship v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2011
- Fifth Third Bancorp v. DudenhoefferSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- Halo v. Yale Health Plan, Director of Benefits & Records Yale UniversityCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2016
291 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.