T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T MI C HA E L F OR D, P la in tif

f - A p p e lla n t, v. HA R T F OR D L I F E AN D A C C I DE NT I N S U R A N C E C O M P A N Y , aC onne c t i c ut c o rp o r a t i o n ; LONG TE RM DI SABI LI TY PLA N O F BRO W N A N D SH A RPE MANU F AC T UR I NG C OMP AN Y, D efen d an t s - A p p el l ees. N o. 08- 56522 D . C . N o. 2: 06 -c v-03 66 5-G W -E ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e C e n tr a l D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia G e or ge H . W u, D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry 2, 2010

P a s a d e n a , C a lif

o rn ia B efo re: S C H R O E D E R , F IS H E R an d N . R . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es. I n th is E R I S A a c tio n , M ic h a e l F o r d ap p e a ls th e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s ju d g m e n t in fa vo r of the appel l ee s, ho l di ng thatdefe nd antH art ford L i fe and A cc i dentInsura nce 

# FI LED FEB 18 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

C o m p a n y ( “H a r tf

o r d ” ) , th e p la n a d m in is tr a to r , d id n o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n in t e rm i na t i ng be ne f

i t s unde rthe L ong T e rm D i s abi l i ty P l a n of B r ow n & S ha rpe M a nuf a c tur i ng C om pa ny . W hi l e the c a s e w a s pe ndi ng i n the di s tr i c tc our t , the S upr e m e C our tde c i de d Me tr opol i tan L i f e I ns ur anc e C o. v . G le nn , 128 S . C t . 2343 (200 8). T he di stri ctcourtca l l ed for s up pl em ent al bri ef s on the S up re m e C ou rt d e c is io n , b u t th e n c o n c lu d e d th a t G le nn d id n o t r e q u ir e a n a n a ly s is th a t m a te r ia lly d if f e r e d f r o m th a t w h ic h w a s ap p r o p r ia te u n d e rp r io rN in th C ir c u it la w w ith r e s p e c t to ap p lic a tio n o f th e ab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n s ta n d a r d . T he di s tr i c tc our t , how e ve r , di d notha ve the be ne f i tof ouri nt e rve ni ng opi ni on i n Montourv . H ar t f ord L i f e & A c c i de nt

I ns ur anc e C o. , 588 F . 3d 623, 631- 3 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 9 ) , h o w e v e r , w h ic h h e ld th a t Me tL ife — consi st entw i th o ur en ba nc de c i s i on i n A bat i e v . A l ta H e al th and L i

f e I ns . C o. , 4 5 8 F .3 d 9 5 5 , 9 6 6 - 6 9 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 6 ) ( e n b a n c ) — o v e rru le d in r e le v a n t p a r t as ig n if ic a n t p r io rlin e o f

N in th C i r c ui tc a s e s appl y i ng the abus e of di s c r e t i on s t a nda r d of

r e vi e w , i nc l udi ng J

ordan v . N or thr op G r um m an C or

p. W e l f ar e B e ne f i t P lan , 370 F . 3d 869 ( 9th C i r . 2004) a nd B e ndi

x e n v . Standard I

ns ur anc e C o. , 185 F . 3d 939 ( 9th C i r . 1999) . W hi l e the p art i es w ere ask ed t o d i scu ss Montouri n o ra l ar gu m ent , they w er e notabl e t o b ri ef it to th is c o u r t.3

B e c aus e the di s tr i c tc our tr e l i e d on ove rrul e d a r t i c ul a t i ons of the abus e of di s c r e t i on s t a nda r d, a nd be c aus e ne i the rthi s c our tnorthe di s tr i c tc our tha s ha d the benefi tof ful l bri ef

i ng and stud y of the curr entst at e of thi s c i rc ui t ’ s l aw un der now - c ontr ol l i ng S upr e m e C our ta nd c i r c ui tauthor i ty , w e r e ve r s e the j udgm e nta nd r e m a n d th e c a s e to th e d is tr ic t c o u r t to ap p ly th a t au th o r ity in th e f ir s t in s ta n c e . RE V E RS E D a nd R EM A N D ED .