United States Ninth Circuit

In an ERISA case, summary judgment for defendant is vacated and the case remanded where: 1) under the Supreme Court's recent Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Glenn standard, an administrator acting as both the funding source and administrator of a benefits plan creates a structural conflict of interest which must be considered in determining an abuse of administrator discretion; 2) this conflict of interest exists even if the administrator's trust funds the plan; 3) this conflict of interest is mitigated by employee contribution to funding the plan; and 4) this conflict is increased in employer administered plans.

Appellate Information

• Argued 12/07/2007
• Decided 09/19/2008
• Published 09/19/2008

Judges

• TASHIMA, Circuit Judge:, Before: B. FLETCHER, A. WALLACE TASHIMA, and JOHNNIE B. RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Constantin V. Roboostoff, Roboostoff & Kalkin, San Francisco, CA, for the plaintiff-appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Nicole A. Diller, Morgan Lewis & Bockius, San Francisco, CA, for the defendant-appellee.