VARNER v. CIGNA, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 11686 (9th Cir. June 2, 1999) (unpublished)-Before: BRUNETTI, FERNANDEZ, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.
Reversed and remanded grant of summary judgment to defendant. Court said ERISA applies to conversion policies. Policies derived from ERISA plans continue to be governed by ERISA even after conversion upon termination of employment. Peterson v. American Life & Health Ins. Co., 48 F.3d 404, 408 (9th Cir. 1995); Qualls v. Blue Cross of Cal., Inc., 22 F.3d 839, 843 n.4 (9th Cir. 1994); Greany v. Western Farm Bureau Life Ins. Co., 973 F.2d 812, 817 (9th Cir. 1992); see also Painter v. Golden Rule Ins. Co., 121 F.3d 436, 439-40 (8th Cir. 1997), cert. denied, 140 L. Ed. 2d 669, 118 S. Ct. 1516 (1998). Although we recognize that other courts have held to the contrary, see Demars v. Cigna Corp., 173 F.3d 443, 1999 WL 179668 (1st Cir. 1999), Mimbs v. Commercial Life Ins. Co., 818 F. Supp. 1556 (S.D. Ga. 1993), we are bound by our own precedent.
Court held that district court improperly used the abuse of discretion standard. The plan language at issue here ("if your proof doesn't show satisfactorily that you continue to be disabled") is analogous to the policy provision deemed ambiguous in Kearney ("upon receipt of satisfactory written proof that you have become disabled"). Because LINA's plan did not unambiguously retain administrator discretion, the district court erred in using the abuse of discretion standard. See Kearney v. Standard Ins. Co., F.3d , 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 8099, 1999 WL 246485 (9th Cir. 1999).
