You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Spencer Recovery Centers, Inc. v. Eval Co. of America Medical Plan

Citation: 350 F. App'x 152Docket: Nos. 08-55469, 08-55478, 08-56078, 08-56081

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; October 28, 2009; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In the case concerning Spencer Recovery Centers, Inc. versus Eval Company Medical Plan and Marukyo USA Inc. Health Plan, the primary legal issue was the wrongful denial of benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Spencer, acting as an assignee for the beneficiaries, sought benefits that were wrongfully denied by the Plans. The district court found in favor of Spencer, ordering the Plans to pay the benefits, along with pre-judgment interest and attorneys' fees. The appellate court affirmed this decision, confirming jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291. Furthermore, the appellate court granted Spencer's request for attorneys' fees for the appeal, as no special circumstances precluded such an award, and referred the matter to the Appellate Commissioner to determine reasonable fees and costs. The outcome resulted in an affirmed judgment for Spencer, including the award of costs, although the ruling is designated non-precedential and not for publication as per 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Legal Issues Addressed

Award of Attorneys' Fees on Appeal

Application: Spencer Recovery Centers, Inc. was granted attorneys' fees for the appeal as there were no special circumstances present to prevent such an award.

Reasoning: Spencer, acting as the assignee of the beneficiaries, also sought attorneys' fees for the appeal, which were granted as there were no special circumstances against such an award.

Jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291

Application: The appellate court confirmed its jurisdiction over the appeal under 28 U.S.C. 1291, affirming the district court's decision.

Reasoning: The appellate court affirmed the district court's decision, confirming jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291.

Non-Publication and Non-Precedential Nature of Ruling

Application: The court's ruling is designated as non-precedential and not intended for publication except as allowed by specific circuit rules.

Reasoning: This ruling is not intended for publication and is not to be cited as precedent, except as permitted under 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

Referral to Appellate Commissioner for Determination of Fees

Application: The case was referred to the Appellate Commissioner to determine reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.

Reasoning: The case was referred to the Appellate Commissioner to determine the reasonable fees and costs.

Wrongful Denial of Benefits under ERISA

Application: The district court determined that the medical plans wrongfully denied claims filed by Spencer Recovery Centers, Inc., acting as an assignee for the beneficiaries.

Reasoning: The district court ruled in favor of Spencer, determining that the Plans had wrongfully denied the claims and ordered them to pay the benefits, along with pre-judgment interest and attorneys' fees.