Opinion ID: 4167896
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Orzechowski Appeals to the District Court

Text: Orzechowski sought district court review under ERISA, 29 U.S.C. § 1132, of Aetna’s determination that she fell into the mental health exception and was not totally disabled, as 10 ORZECHOWSKI V. BOEING CO. NON-UNION LONG-TERM DISABILITY PLAN required for a continuation of benefits under Boeing’s long term disability plan. Following a bench trial, the district court ruled in favor of Boeing. The district court applied an abuse of discretion standard of review to Orzechowski’s claim, rather than a de novo standard. Orzechowski argued that California Insurance Code § 10110.6 voided the discretionary clause contained in the Plan. The district court, however, held that § 10110.6 does not apply retroactively, and found that the Master Plan was last issued or renewed January 1, 2011, a year before the statute became effective. Therefore, it held that the statute did not render any provision of the Master Plan void and so abuse of discretion was the appropriate standard of review. Applying that standard, the District Court held that “Aetna’s decision to terminate Ms. Orzechowski’s [long-term] benefits was supported by substantial evidence in the record and was not an abuse of discretion.” This appeal followed.