Legal Opinion · Concurring in the judgment

Shelby County Health Care Corp. v. Majestic Star Casino, LLC

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided September 22, 2009No. 08-6078, 08-6419Published

1Concurring in the judgmentRogers, Circuit Judge

The district court should have used an arbitrary and capricious standard to review Majestic’s decision denying the claim at issue; however, Majestic’s decision was arbitrary and capricious and thus I concur in affirming the district court’s award of benefits and prejudgment interest to the Med.

I. Standard for Reviewing ERISA Fiduciaries and Their Agents

Majestic, as a fiduciary with discretionary authority to construe the terms of the Plan, is entitled to have its decisions reviewed under an arbitrary and capricious standard. This court should follow the well-reasoned approach set out by the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Pens. Plan Guide P 23922q Juanita Yeager v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
  3. Sharkey v. Ultramar Energy Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
  4. Kellogg v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
  5. Geddes v. United Staffing Alliance Employee Medical PlanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2006

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API