United States Ninth Circuit

In an ERISA action challenging defendant pension fund's denial of disability benefits, judgment for defendant is affirmed where: 1) the fund's trustees did not abuse their discretion when they determined the date of plaintiff's disability; 2) 29 U.S.C. section 1054(g) did not apply to "employee welfare benefit plans" such as that of defendant; and 3) the Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) applied by the trustees was a separate interest QDRO, and plaintiff thus could not share in any of the benefits allocated to his ex-wife.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/01/2009
• Published 12/01/2009

Judges

• TROTT, Circuit Judge:, Before: STEPHEN S. TROTT and CARLOS T. BEA, Circuit Judges, and SUZANNE B. CONLON, District Judge.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Andrea A. Ambrose and Colin B. Vandell, Latham & Watkins LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for the plaintiff/appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Barry G. Collins, Asher, Gittler, Greenfield & D'Alba, Ltd., Chicago, IL, for the defendants/appellees.