Then there is no mountain. Then there is. The outcome of a case often depends upon which standard is applied. Under de novo review, the Court looks at the claim as it would any other contract dispute. There is no presumption of correctness of a Plan's decision denying a claim.
Deferential review is more restricted.
Participants' attorneys usually try to argue the opposite. Thus, even the simplest benefit dispute takes on a ridiculous degree of complexity. As I have said before, explaining either the Firestone de novo rule or the exception to that rule will cause just about any reader's eyes to glaze over. Nevertheless, the following is a discussion of the rule, and the exception, as well as some ways to get around the exception. The reason for the rule is simple.