Lawyer for Ninth Circuit ERISA Cases
Serving Alaska, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Northern Marina Islands, Oregon & Washington
ERISA Law Center represents claimants across all areas covered by the Ninth Circuit. If your ERISA claim is to be handled by this court, we can offer guidance related to the case law that could impact the outcome of your claim. Every court and judge may address ERISA proceedings in a different manner, and this could have a direct influence on whether or not the court finds in your favor. With an ERISA lawyer from our firm to protect your rights and represent your interests, you can feel confident that the best possible result will be pursued on your behalf.
The Ninth Circuit is physically the largest circuit in the Federal system and has the greatest number of judges, so it is not always consistent from case to case. That noted, precedential rulings (rulings that are binding on lower courts and on the Ninth Circuit) in key areas of ERISA benefits litigation have been quite favorable for claimants. For example, the Ninth Circuit requires insurance companies and plan administrators to explicitly explain why they did not follow Social Security Disability determinations when they reach conclusions inconsistent with the Social Security Administration. The Ninth Circuit also allows claimants to raise new issues in litigation even if they didn't raise them administratively, while simultaneously barring administrators and insurance companies from raising new arguments and defenses in litigation which they didn't present administratively. The Ninth Circuit allows claimants to raise new issues in litigation because it reasons that ERISA regulations only require claimants to present their claim, not all their issues administratively. The Ninth Circuit prevents plan administrators and insurance companies from raising new arguments and defenses in litigation because it reasons that ERISA regulations require plan administrators and insurance companies to state all their reasons for denying benefits during the administrative process and not "hold in reserve" additional reasons to present only in litigation.