UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
Choose an item. DIVISION
Plaintiff(s)., }
}
Choose an item., }
}
v. } Case No.: Case Number.
}
Defendant(s)., }
}
Choose an item.. }
INITIAL ORDER IN ERISA BENEFITS CASES
The above-styled case appears to make a claim for benefits and/or other
relief under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”). It therefore
requires specialized treatment. On or before Click here to enter a date. (60 days
from entry of order), the parties SHALL file a joint report, under Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 26(f), which states their respective positions as to the following
questions:
(1) If plaintiff has named more than one defendant, do the defendants
agree that a particular named defendant, or a third-party who is not a defendant, is
the single entity responsible for the alleged ERISA violation or violations? If so,
name that entity.
(2) Provide the court with an electronic and paper copy of the
administrative record as it presently exists, including the plan document and the
summary plan description. Are the parties in agreement about the accuracy and
completeness of the administrative record as it presently exists? If the parties
disagree about the accuracy or completeness of the current administrative record,
what is the basis for their disagreement?
(3) If the court finds monetary liability, do the parties agree on the
amount due, taking into consideration any offsets? If so, state the amount. If not,
each party SHALL explain the amount it proposes.
(4) Does plaintiff seek benefits only pursuant to 29 U.S.C.
§ 1132(a)(1)(B), or does plaintiff seek relief pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(3)?
(5) Do the parties agree that the case should be decided on the
administrative record alone? If not, what additional presently available evidence
should be considered, and why?
(6) If any party believes that discovery beyond the administrative record
will be needed, describe the nature of such evidence, and how the party proposes to
obtain it.
(7) What is the proper standard of review, and why?
(8) If any defendant relies upon a discretionary clause in the plan, does
Plaintiff concede that the clause meets the Bruch standard? If not, why?
2
(9) Did any decision-maker whose decision is contested, operate under a
structural conflict-of-interest?
(10) If any defendant interposes a defense of plaintiff’s alleged failure to
exhaust administrative remedies, what does the alleged failure consists of?
(11) Is this case subject to remand of the dispute to the plan administrator,
or other decision-making entity? If not, explain why?
(12) Does plaintiff claim any procedural shortcoming by defendant or
defendants that may affect liability? If so, describe.
(13) Has the Social Security Administration been involved in any way in
the subject-matter of the case? If so, describe that involvement in detail along with
the result.
(14) Does plaintiff complain about the decision-maker’s interpretation of
the plan language? If so, what is the difference in interpretation between the
parties?
(15) Does plaintiff complain about any of the plan administrator’s findings
of fact (in contrast to conclusions reached upon such facts)? If so, in what
respects?
(16) Does any party believe that the liability question cannot be finally
disposed of upon cross-motions by the parties on a written record? If not, explain
why in detail.
3
(17) When should the case be ready for a final disposition, whether upon
cross-motions or upon bench trial?
(18) Does any party desire mediation?
Upon receipt of the parties’ joint report, the court will set this case for a
scheduling conference by separate order.
4
