Perspective
Jun. 1, 2012
9th Circuit on Amara: no harm, no foul — no remedy
The 9th Circuit recently had an opportunity to interpret Amara regarding summary plan descriptions. By Stephen Harris, Caroline Elkin and Melinda Gordon of Paul Hastings
In Cigna v. Amara, the Supreme Court held that participants cannot bring a claim for benefits under ERISA Section 502(a)(1)(B) based on statements contained in summary plan descriptions (SPD) or other writings that are not the plan document, but might be able to recover benefits under the guise of Section 502(a)(3)'s equitable remedies. Many plaintiffs' attorneys viewed the case as a game changer...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In