WASHINGTON (CN) – The U.S. Supreme Court sided with an Ohio woman who claimed MetLife had denied her disability claim due to a conflict of interest that courts should take into consideration.
The justices voted 6-3 to reinstate the disability claims of Wanda Glenn, who sued the insurer for allegedly deeming her capable of working a sedentary job in order to avoid paying extended benefits.
Justice Breyer, writing for the majority, said the courts should consider any potential conflicts of interest when determining whether a plan administrator abused its discretion in denying benefits. But the significance of that conflict depends on the circumstances of the case, the justices ruled, and the courts must consider other factors for a fair and accurate review.
Justice Kennedy dissented in part, and Justices Scalia and Thomas filed a dissenting opinion.