Staley v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

United States District Court for the Northern District of California

Staley v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 SHARAE M. STALEY, Case No. 20-cv-09497-HSG

8 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL 9 v. DISCOVERY

10 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE Re: Dkt. No. 20 COMPANY, 11 Defendant. 12 13 On February 4, 2021, Plaintiff Sharae M. Staley brought this ERISA action against 14 Defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”), alleging a failure to provide 15 benefits and a breach of fiduciary duties. Dkt. No. 10 (“FAC”) ¶¶ 34, 42. On April 7, 2021, the 16 parties appeared before the Court for a case management conference. The Court ordered 17 supplemental briefing from the parties regarding the scope of discovery. See Dkt. No. 15. Having 18 reviewed the parties’ briefing, see Dkt. Nos. 19, 20, the Court, in its discretion, GRANTS 19 Plaintiff’s request for discovery beyond the administrative record. 20 As an initial matter, MetLife contends that the abuse of discretion standard of review 21 applies. The Ninth Circuit requires an “abuse of discretion review whenever an ERISA plan 22 grants discretion to the plan administrator.” Abatie v. Alta Health & Life Ins. Co.,

458 F.3d 955

, 23 967 (9th Cir. 2006). Because the ERISA plan at issue confers discretionary authority on MetLife, 24 see Dkt. No. 19, Ex. A at 9-3, 9-12, the Court finds that the abuse of discretion standard of review 25 applies, based on the language of the policy and absent any showing otherwise by Plaintiff. 26 Plaintiff contends that under any standard of review, additional discovery is warranted on 27 her equitable relief claim under

29 U.S.C. §1132

(a)(3) for breach of fiduciary duty. To 1 depositions of two MetLife claims adjusters and the production of the complete claim file and the 2 claims manual guidelines. Dkt. No. 20 at 1. Defendant does not dispute that the Court has 3 discretion to permit discovery relating to a purported conflict of interest. See Dkt. No. 19 at 3. In 4 light of Plaintiff's allegations, the Court, in its discretion, GRANTS the requested discovery. The 5 Court DIRECTS MetLife to produce the requested materials within 30 days. The Court further 6 DIRECTS the parties to meet and confer to schedule the depositions of the two claims adjusters. 7 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: 4/30/2021 10 7 Haspurred ZB Ld □□□ HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. 11 United States District Judge a 12

14 ° 15 16

17

Z 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown