DEREK KRAMER v. AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE PLAN; AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER SERVICE CORPORATION - Articles

All Content

DEREK KRAMER v. AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE PLAN; AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER SERVICE CORPORATION

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Feb 10, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Tony C. Merry, LAW OFFICES OF TONY C. MERRY, LLC, Worthington, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Jason T. Gerken, PORTER, WRIGHT, MORRIS & ARTHUR, LLP, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellees.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Tony C. Merry, LAW OFFICES OF TONY C. MERRY, LLC, Worthington, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Jason T. Gerken, PORTER, WRIGHT, MORRIS & ARTHUR, LLP, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellees.

Attorneys 5: ON BRIEF: Christopher J. Rillo, BAKER BOTTS L.L.P., San Francisco, California, for Amicus Curiae.

Judge(s): COLE, MATHIS, and BLOOMEKATZ, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Columbus

MATHIS, Circuit Judge. This case looks like a standard claim under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) to recover benefits. But Derek Kramer wants to change the rules for these claims. Kramer believes he has a right to “full discovery,” including documents subject to the attorney-client privilege, rather than an adjudication based on the administrative record. Kramer also thinks he has a constitutional right to a jury trial for his ERISA claim. And he seeks to apply a different standard to adjudicate his claim than the one we instructed district courts to use more than two decades ago. We reject Kramer’s request to change the rules. e the rules. On the merits, Kramer has not shown that the district court erred in finding that the decision denying Kramer benefits was not arbitrary and capricious. We thus affirm.

Attachments: