Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Thomason v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.

United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division

February 25, 2016, Decided; February 25, 2016, Filed

No. 3:14-CV-0086-P

Opinion

 [*514]  ORDER

Now before the Court is Plaintiff Joel Thomason's ("Thomason") Motion for Summary Judgment, filed on March 5, 2015. Doc. 58. Defendants Metropolitan Life Insurance Company ("MetLife") and Verizon Employee Benefits Committee ("VEBC") filed a response on April 10, 2015. Doc. 81. Thomason filed a reply on April 24, 2015. Doc. 87.

Also before the Court is Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, filed on April 2, 2015. Doc. 74. Thomason filed a response on April 7, 2015. Doc. 77. Defendants filed a reply on April 21, 2015. Doc. 84.

The Court also reviews Thomason's Objections to Defendants' Summary Judgment Evidence, filed April 8, 2015. Doc.  [*515]  80. Defendants filed a response on April 22, 2015. Doc. 85. Thomason filed a reply on April 30, 2015. Doc. 92.

Also before the Court is Thomason's Objections to Defendants' Additional Summary Judgment Evidence, filed on April 24, [**2]  2015. Doc. 88. Defendants filed a response on May 8, 2015. Doc. 93. Thomason filed a reply on May 14, 2015. Doc. 96.

After reviewing the parties' briefing, the evidence, and the applicable law, the Court partially GRANTS Thomason's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 58) and DENIES Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. 74). The Court also finds Thomason's objections MOOT. Docs. 80, 88.

I. Background

This case involves a dispute as to whether an offset was properly taken against the monthly long-term disability ("LTD") benefit payments to Thomason under VEBC's Plan for Group Insurance (the "Plan"). The Plan is an employee welfare benefit plan governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 - 1461 ("ERISA"). Doc. 76 at 54. Here, MetLife, as the LTD claim administrator, is vested with discretionary authority to adjudicate LTD claims and interpret the terms of the Plan. Id. at 48-49. The Plan is thoroughly explained through the Summary Plan Description ("SPD"). The SPD provides that certain benefits are offset from the LTD benefit amount, including "[p]ension benefits from a Verizon pension plan, if you elect to receive them." Doc. 76 at 39. Notably, however, the SPD is incorporated [**3]  into the Plan by reference. Doc. 75 at 6 (citing Doc. 76 at 11).

Both parties now move for summary judgment.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

165 F. Supp. 3d 512 *; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28224 **

JOEL THOMASON, Plaintiff, v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and VERIZON EMPLOYEE BENEFITS COMMITTEE, Defendants.

Subsequent History: Affirmed by Thomason v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 703 Fed. Appx. 247, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 12932 (5th Cir. Tex., July 18, 2017)

Prior History: Thomason v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55213 (N.D. Tex., Apr. 27, 2015)

CORE TERMS

benefits, summary judgment, Defendants', factors, pension, pension plan, asserts, offset, summary judgment motion, ambiguous, documents, contra proferentem, rollover, bad faith, grant summary judgment, abuse of discretion, regulations, receives, Partial, courts, rolled, retirement, incorrect, lump-sum, two-step, DENIES