Katherine White v. Life Insurance Company of North America

Eighth Circuit

Katherine White v. Life Insurance Company of North America

377 F. App'x 562

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJune 1, 2010

Docket09-3630

StatusUnpublished

This text of 377 F. App'x 562 (Katherine White v. Life Insurance Company of North America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Katherine White v. Life Insurance Company of North America, 377 F. App'x 562 (8th Cir. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Katherine White appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) lawsuit arising from the disposition of her claims for short-term-disability (STD) and long-term-disability (LTD) benefits. Upon de novo review, see Darvell v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 597 F.3d 929, 934 (8th Cir.2010) (standard of review), we find that summary judgment was proper on the STD benefits decision, as the record showed that White did not file a timely administrative appeal and thus did not exhaust her administrative remedies, see Price v. Xerox Corp., 445 F.3d 1054, 1057 (8th Cir. 2006). As to the denial of LTD benefits, we find no abuse of discretion. See Jackson v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 530 F.3d 696, 701 (8th Cir.2008) (plan administrator’s decision should not be disturbed when administrator offers reasonable explanation and decision is supported by substantial evidence) White offered evidence showing that she was diagnosed with, and received ongoing treatment for, interstitial cystitis and fibromyalgia, but she failed to offer sufficient evidence that these conditions rendered her disabled under the terms of her plan. See Darvell, 597 F.3d at 935 (it is not abuse of discretion for administrator to ignore opinion when physician failed to provide reliable objective evidence to support finding of LTD); Midgett v. Wash. Group Int'l Long Term Disability Plan, 561 F.3d 887, 897 (8th Cir.2009) (courts may not require plan administrators automatically to give special weight to opinions of claimant’s treating physicians); see also Rutledge v. Liberty Life Assurance Co. of Boston, 481 F.3d 655, 660-61 (8th Cir.2007) (ERISA plan administrator is not bound by Social Security Administration’s determination that plan participant is disabled even if plan defines disability similarly). We decline to consider the arguments White raises for the first time on appeal. See Cole v. Int'l Union, United Auto., Aerospace & Agric. Implement Workers of Am., 533 F.3d 932, 936 (8th Cir.2008). Accordingly, we affirm.

1

. The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

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

PER CURIAM.

Katherine White appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) lawsuit arising from the disposition of her claims for short-term-disability (STD) and long-term-disability (LTD) benefits. Upon de novo review, see Darvell v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 597 F.3d 929, 934 (8th Cir.2010) (standard of review), we find that summary judgment was proper on the STD benefits decision, as the record showed that White did not file a timely administrative appeal and thus did not exhaust her administrative remedies, see Price v. Xerox Corp., 445 F.3d 1054, 1057 (8th Cir. 2006). As to the denial of LTD benefits, we find no abuse of discretion. See Jackson v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 530 F.3d 696, 701 (8th Cir.2008) (plan administrator’s decision should not be disturbed when administrator offers reasonable explanation and decision is supported by substantial evidence) White offered evidence showing that she was diagnosed with, and received ongoing treatment for, interstitial cystitis and fibromyalgia, but she failed to offer sufficient evidence that these conditions rendered her disabled under the terms of her plan. See Darvell, 597 F.3d at 935 (it is not abuse of discretion for administrator to ignore opinion when physician failed to provide reliable objective evidence to support finding of LTD); Midgett v. Wash. Group Int'l Long Term Disability Plan, 561 F.3d 887, 897 (8th Cir.2009) (courts may not require plan administrators automatically to give special weight to opinions of claimant’s treating physicians); see also Rutledge v. Liberty Life Assurance Co. of Boston, 481 F.3d 655, 660-61 (8th Cir.2007) (ERISA plan administrator is not bound by Social Security Administration’s determination that plan participant is disabled even if plan defines disability similarly). We decline to consider the arguments White raises for the first time on appeal. See Cole v. Int'l Union, United Auto., Aerospace & Agric. Implement Workers of Am., 533 F.3d 932, 936 (8th Cir.2008). Accordingly, we affirm.

1

. The Honorable Susan Webber Wright, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

377 F. App'x 562, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/katherine-white-v-life-insurance-company-of-north-america-ca8-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack