Kulkarni v. CDK Global, Inc.

W.D. North Carolina

Kulkarni v. CDK Global, Inc.

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. North Carolina

DecidedOctober 18, 2023

Docket3:22-cv-00562

StatusUnknown

This text of Kulkarni v. CDK Global, Inc. (Kulkarni v. CDK Global, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kulkarni v. CDK Global, Inc., (W.D.N.C. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:22-cv-562-MOC

K. K. AND A. K., ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ORDER ) CDK GLOBAL, INC. AND NATIONAL ) UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF ) PITTSBURGH, PA, INC., ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________)

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Order to Establish Certain Material as Part of Administrative Record. (Doc. No. 26). I. BACKGROUND In this action arising under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et. seq., Plaintiffs seek a finding from the Court that Plaintiffs are entitled to recover from the Defendant’s accidental death benefits under an ERISA plan. Plaintiff has filed the pending motion, seeking to include as part of the administrative record a police report prepared by the Rocky Mount Police Department and which would support Plaintiff’s contention that the death of Defendant CDK employee Samir Kulkarni was accidental and not suicide. Defendant opposes Plaintiff’s motion on the ground that the police record was not before the plan administrator when the administrator made the decision to deny accidental death benefits. (Doc. No. 31). II. DISCUSSION The Court will grant Plaintiff's motion. Here, the plan language does not give the plan administrator fiduciary discretionary authority to determine eligibility for benefits. Under the Fourth Circuit’s decision in Johnson v. Am. United Life Ins. Co., 716 F.3d 813, 819-20 (4th Cir. 2013), where no such discretionary authority is granted, the issue presented is not the reasonableness of the plan’s decision to deny benefits, but whether the decision was correct based on established principles of contract law. A police report concluding that a death was not suicide would certainly be relevant to determining whether Defendant’s decision was correct based on the plan’s language. ORDER IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Order to Establish Certain Material as Part of Administrative Record. (Doc. No. 26), is GRANTED.

Signed: October 18, 2023

Vo a) pr-ervrnca Max O. Cogburn i yg United States District Judge Tie ga

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:22-cv-562-MOC

K. K. AND A. K., ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ORDER ) CDK GLOBAL, INC. AND NATIONAL ) UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF ) PITTSBURGH, PA, INC., ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________)

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Order to Establish Certain Material as Part of Administrative Record. (Doc. No. 26). I. BACKGROUND In this action arising under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et. seq., Plaintiffs seek a finding from the Court that Plaintiffs are entitled to recover from the Defendant’s accidental death benefits under an ERISA plan. Plaintiff has filed the pending motion, seeking to include as part of the administrative record a police report prepared by the Rocky Mount Police Department and which would support Plaintiff’s contention that the death of Defendant CDK employee Samir Kulkarni was accidental and not suicide. Defendant opposes Plaintiff’s motion on the ground that the police record was not before the plan administrator when the administrator made the decision to deny accidental death benefits. (Doc. No. 31). II. DISCUSSION The Court will grant Plaintiff's motion. Here, the plan language does not give the plan administrator fiduciary discretionary authority to determine eligibility for benefits. Under the Fourth Circuit’s decision in Johnson v. Am. United Life Ins. Co., 716 F.3d 813, 819-20 (4th Cir. 2013), where no such discretionary authority is granted, the issue presented is not the reasonableness of the plan’s decision to deny benefits, but whether the decision was correct based on established principles of contract law. A police report concluding that a death was not suicide would certainly be relevant to determining whether Defendant’s decision was correct based on the plan’s language. ORDER IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Order to Establish Certain Material as Part of Administrative Record. (Doc. No. 26), is GRANTED.

Signed: October 18, 2023

Vo a) pr-ervrnca Max O. Cogburn i yg United States District Judge Tie ga

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Kulkarni v. CDK Global, Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kulkarni-v-cdk-global-inc-ncwd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack