Rosby v. Unum Life Insurance Co. of America , 391 F. App'x 579 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                     United States Court of Appeals
    FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
    ___________
    No. 09-3648
    ___________
    Karen R. Rosby,                     *
    *
    Appellant,               *
    * Appeal from the United States
    v.                             * District Court for the
    * Eastern District of Arkansas.
    Unum Life Insurance Company of      *
    America,                            * [UNPUBLISHED]
    *
    Appellee.                *
    ___________
    Submitted: August 13, 2010
    Filed: August 24, 2010
    ___________
    Before BYE, BOWMAN, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
    ___________
    PER CURIAM.
    Karen Rosby appeals the district court’s1 affirmance of Unum Life Insurance
    Company of America’s (Unum’s) termination of long-term disability benefits in this
    action under the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).
    After careful de novo review of the record, we conclude that Unum, the
    administrator of Rosby’s employer-based disability plan, did not abuse its discretion
    1
    The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, Chief Judge, United States District Court for
    the Eastern District of Arkansas.
    in terminating Rosby’s disability benefits because its decision was supported by
    substantial evidence that Rosby could perform the material and substantial duties of
    her job, as detailed in the district court’s opinion. See Norris v. Citibank, N.A.
    Disability Plan (501), 
    308 F.3d 880
    , 883-84 (8th Cir. 2002) (appellate standard of
    review and applicable standard for reviewing plan administrator’s decision under
    ERISA). We also decline to remand based on a Social Security Administration
    decision that was not part of the administrative record or binding on Unum, see
    Wakkinen v. Unum Life Ins. Co., 
    531 F.3d 575
    , 583 (8th Cir. 2008) (examining only
    evidence before plan administrator when benefits decision was made); Rutledge v.
    Liberty Life Assurance Co., 
    481 F.3d 655
    , 660-61 (8th Cir. 2007) (ERISA plan
    administrator not bound by Social Security Administration decision), or based on
    Rosby’s dissatisfaction with counsel’s assistance, see Glick v. Henderson, 
    855 F.2d 536
    , 541 (8th Cir. 1988) (no constitutional or statutory right to effective assistance of
    counsel in civil case).
    Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 09-3648

Citation Numbers: 391 F. App'x 579

Judges: Bye, Bowman, Colloton

Filed Date: 8/24/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024