Note

Giving Deference to Inaction: How Geddes v. United Staffing Alliance Employee Medical Plan Compromised an Employee's Right to Meaningful Review Under ERISA

Author: Erin Nave (Washington University School of Law)

Abstract

This Note proposes that the arbitrary and capricious standard of review should be eliminated in favor of a de novo standard of review in all benefits denial cases.

Keywords: Judicial review, Employee fringe benefits, Employee benefits, Judicial discretion, Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, Geddes v. United Staffing Alliance Employee Medical Plan

How to Cite: Nave, E. (2009) “Giving Deference to Inaction: How Geddes v. United Staffing Alliance Employee Medical Plan Compromised an Employee's Right to Meaningful Review Under ERISA”, Washington University Journal of Law and Policy. 29(1).