In Leirer v. P&G Disability Ben. Plan, No. 17-3426 (8th Cir. 2018), Gary Leirer worked for the Proctor & Gamble Company (which maintained the Proctor & Gamble Disability Benefit Plan, collectively, the “Company”) for many years. He became disabled as a result of a medical condition and began receiving total disability benefits. Following a medical examination, the Company later determined that Leirer was partially disabled, and it terminated his benefits when his partial disability coverage ended. After the Company upheld its determination, Leirer filed suit under section 502(a)(1)(B) of ERISA (a suit for benefits). The district court granted summary judgment in favor the Company, and Mr. Leirer appeals.
After reviewing the case, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals (the “Court”) upheld the district court’s decision. In doing so, the Court noted the following. Mr. Leirer has not shown that a serious procedural irregularity existed, which caused a serious breach of the plan administrator’s fiduciary duty to him. Further, the Company’s denial letter adequately stated the reasons supporting its decision. The Company’s interpretation of the plan was reasonable and the Independent Medical Examination and Functional Capacity Evaluation constituted substantial evidence in support of its decision. Also, there was no evidence that the Plan administrators’ conflict of interest—arising from their dual responsibilities of adjudicating Leirer’s claim and paying his benefits—affected the disposition of Leirer’s claim.