Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 27 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Hobson v. Metropolitan Life Insurance.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hobson v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Anchor | green | “under the arbitrary and capricious standard of review, a court may overturn an administrator's decision to deny erisa benefits 'only if it was without reason, unsupported by substantial evidence or erroneous as a matter of law.” | 15 |
| 2 | Anna Fay and Louis Fay v. Oxford Health Plan, Mount Sinai Medical Center Point-Of-Service-Plan | green | “the plan administrator bears the burden of proving that the deferential standard of review applies.” | 12 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.