ERISA Litigation episode 007 contains Bentley Tolk’s (Parr Brown Gee & Loveless, Salt Lake City, UT – ERISA litigation defense) analysis of the Supreme Court’s decision in CIGNA Corp. v. Amara. The Amara case contains important guidance on misrepresentations, plan reformation, SPDs and equitable remedies under ERISA.

In ERISA litigation episode 006, Bentley Tolk (Parr Brown Gee & Loveless, Salt Lake City, UT) explores how the U.S. Supreme Court case of Hardt v. Reliance Standard Ins. Co. has altered the landscape of attorneys’ fees under ERISA.

In ERISA Litigation episode 005, Bentley Tolk (Parr Brown Gee & Loveless, Salt Lake City, UT) examines the U.S. Supreme Court’s April 21, 2010 Conkright v. Frommert decision.  The Conkright decision is significant for its clarification of the standard of review under ERISA when a plan administrator makes an “honest” mistake in interpreting the plan.  According to the Supreme Court, one “honest” mistake in interpreting a plan is not enough to strip a plan administrator of deference for subsequent related interpretations of the plan.

In ERISA Litigation episode 4 (due to the digital re-mastery of episode 2), Bentley Tolk explores two standard of review cases from the 7th Circuit.