Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 20 DECEMBER 2010

The ERISA Litigation Newsletter - December 2010

Proskauer Rose LLP
Proskauer Rose LLP
Contributor
Proskauer Rose LLP

Proskauer Rose LLP

Firm Overview Proskauer is an elite global law firm with more than 900 lawyers across key financial...

View firm profile
Explore more from Proskauer Rose LLP

The Supreme Court is expected to rule in Spring 2011 in the case of "CIGNA Corp. v. Amara". As the authors explain below, depending on the breadth of the Supreme Court’s ruling, the decision could have widespread implications on the sustainability of a large variety of claims under ERISA that are premised on allegations of faulty communications.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

EDITOR'S OVERVIEW

The Supreme Court is expected to rule in Spring 2011 in the case of CIGNA Corp. v. Amara. As the authors explain below, depending on the breadth of the Supreme Court's ruling, the decision could have widespread implications on the sustainability of a large variety of claims under ERISA that are premised on allegations of faulty communications.

As always, be sure to review the section on Rulings, Filings and Settlements of Interest.

CIGNA CORP. V. AMARA: THE "LIKELY PREJUDICE" STANDARD UNDER THE MICROSCOPE1

Contributed by Myron Rumeld & Nicole A. Eichberger

On November 30, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in CIGNA Corp. v. Amara, Case No. 09-804. Certiorari was granted to address the question of what showing of harm, if any, a participant must demonstrate in order to recover on a claim where the Summary Plan Description ("SPD") conflicts with the terms of the plan document. Depending on the breadth of the Supreme Court's

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from