Vigdorchik v. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston

Background

Natalya Vigdorchik sued Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston and the Wells Fargo & Company Long-Term Disability Plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, commonly called ERISA. The parties agreed that the court would use de novo review to decide whether Vigdorchik was entitled to benefits under the Plan. De novo review means the court independently evaluates whether the benefits decision was correct, without deferring to the plan administrator’s decision.

The dispute addressed whether Vigdorchik could obtain discovery before the court reviewed her benefits claim. She requested interrogatories about the Liberty Life experts’ prior reports for Liberty Life, their compensation, and payments made by Liberty Life to the company that purportedly hired and paid them. She also stated that she might need to question Liberty Life personnel or the experts themselves.

Legal standard

The court explained that an ERISA benefits case reviewed de novo is usually decided based on the administrative record—the evidence considered by the plan administrator. A court may consider evidence outside that record, but Ninth Circuit precedent limits that discretion to cases in which exceptional circumstances clearly show that additional evidence is necessary for an adequate review of the benefits decision.

Ruling

The court held that Vigdorchik had not established exceptional circumstances warranting discovery. It found that she provided no specific facts showing that information about the experts’ independence, impartiality, or compensation was necessary to determine whether she had established disability and entitlement to benefits. The court also stated that any bias inherent in using a retained expert was apparent and did not itself justify discovery.

The court DENIED Vigdorchik’s request to conduct discovery. It also SET a further case-management conference for December 10, 2019, at 2:00 p.m., and DIRECTED the parties to file a stipulation and proposed order concerning a case schedule by December 3, 2019. The order did not decide whether Vigdorchik was entitled to benefits.