Carpenter v. CNA, Continental Casualty Co.
This text of 96 F. App'x 993 (Carpenter v. CNA, Continental Casualty Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Dail Carpenter appeals the district court’s judgment in favor of plan administrator Continental Casualty Company on his claim for long-term disability benefits under 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq. (ERISA). Carpenter argues that (1) in evaluating Continental Casualty’s decision to deny Carpenter long-term disability benefits, the district court should have applied a de novo standard of review, instead of the more deferential arbitrary and capricious standard, and (2) under either standard, [994]*994the district court erred in upholding Continental Casualty’s decision.
Oral argument, the parties’ briefs, and our study of both the appellate record and the applicable law convince us that the district court (1) correctly applied the arbitrary and capricious standard of review, Leeal v. Continental Casualty Co., 17 Fed. Appx. 341 (6th Cir.2001), and (2) properly concluded that Continental Casualty reasonably decided to deny Carpenter long-term disability benefits. We accordingly affirm the district court’s judgment for the reasons stated in that court’s decision and entry setting forth findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
96 F. App'x 993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carpenter-v-cna-continental-casualty-co-ca6-2004.