Krochmal v. Paul Revere Life Insurance
Michigan Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtMeter, J.
Defendant appeals as of right, challenging the trial court’s order overruling defendant’s claims representative’s decision to discontinue disability benefits to plaintiff and ordering the reinstatement of monthly benefits. We agree with the trial court that the disability policy at issue is not governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 USC 1001 et seq. Moreover, although we believe that the “arbitrary and capricious” standard of review should have applied to the evaluation of the claims representative’s decision, we are bound to follow a decision of this Court…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Benito T. PEREZ, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
- Maria H. Pinto v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
- Pens. Plan Guide P 23922q Juanita Yeager v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
- Jayedeane Thompson v. American Home Assurance Company, Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bragg v. ABN AMRO North America, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2008
- Krochmal v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co.Michigan Court of Appeals · 2004