143401P.pdf   09/03/2015  Yafei Huang  v.  Life Ins. Co. of North America
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  14-3401
   U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Melloy, Author, with Gruender and Benton, Circuit Judges] 
   Civil case - ERISA. It was reasonable for the plan administrator to find 
   that delivery of the application to plaintiff during the claims process 
   satisfied the plan language as she was the insured's personal 
   representative and the beneficiary of the policy; the express statutory 
   language in Missouri plainly sets forth delivery of the instrument to the 
   beneficiary as an alternative, rather than as an additional duty, and 
   because plaintiff's public-policy/legislative intent argument is contrary 
   to the plain language, it is rejected; with respect to plaintiff's claim 
   that she and the insured let another policy lapse based on defendant's 
   agent's representations, their reliance on the oral representations was 
   not reasonable; the plan application and summary plan description 
   adequately and fairly presented the requirements for supplemental 
   insurance and did not amount to a breach of fiduciary duty; no reasonable 
   jury could find a breach of fiduciary duty based on the appearance of the 
   application.