Hill v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan

613 F. App'x 418
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedAugust 19, 2015
Docket14-41159
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 613 F. App'x 418 (Hill v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hill v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan, 613 F. App'x 418 (5th Cir. 2015).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Gregory Hill, a retired football player, sought benefits from the Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Retirement Plan (“the Plan”), which is an ERISA plan that provides disability benefits to former NFL players. The Plan administrator granted Hill’s claim for benefits but found that he was entitled to a lower monthly benefit than Hill requested. Hill sought review of the Plan administrator’s decision in federal court, arguing that he is entitled to a greater monthly benefit. Reviewing under the deferential abuse-of-discretion framework, the district court ruled in favor of the Plan.

Hill appealed. Having studied the record and briefs, and having heard the oral argument of the parties, we agree with the district court’s conclusions that the Plan administrator did not abuse its discretion in interpreting the Plan or in deciding the benefit to which Hill is entitled under the Plan. We, therefore, affirm the judgment of the district court. 1

AFFIRMED.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

1

. "[I]f the language of the plan ... grantfs] the plan administrator discretionary authority *419 to construe the terms of the plan or determine eligibility for benefits, a plan’s eligibility determination must be upheld by a court unless it is found to be an abuse of discretion.” Atkins v. Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle NFL Player Ret. Plan, 694 F.3d 557, 566 (5th Cir.2012). "[F]actual determinations made by the plan administrator during the course of a benefits review will be rejected only upon a showing of abuse of discretion.” Id.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
613 F. App'x 418, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-bert-bellpete-rozelle-nfl-player-retirement-plan-ca5-2015.