## Facts

- Donald Brumm, a former NFL player and vested participant in the Bert Bell NFL Retirement Plan, played from 1963 to 1972 and suffered multiple back and knee injuries.
- After retirement, Brumm worked in several jobs, including truck driver; in 1977 he had a truck accident that injured his back.
- Contemporaneous medical notes described pre-existing traumatic spondylolisthesis with degenerative changes indicating the condition was old and attributed the underlying injury to his professional football career.
- Brumm stopped working in December 1984, reporting constant back pain and inability to work, and applied for disability benefits in November 1984.
- The Plan defined “totally and permanently disabled” as being prevented from engaging in any occupation for remuneration or profit.
- The Plan provided two benefit levels: Level 1 if total and permanent disability was due to “a football injury incurred while an Active Player,” and Level 2 if disability resulted from other than a football injury; the quoted phrase was not defined.
- A Plan-selected physician’s evaluation created ambiguity about whether Brumm was totally disabled.
- After internal proceedings, the Plan’s Retirement Board denied Brumm Level 1 benefits, treating his condition as not sufficiently attributable to a football injury, and the district court granted summary judgment for the Plan.

## Issues

1. Whether the Board’s interpretation and application of “a football injury incurred while an Active Player” to deny Level 1 benefits was arbitrary and capricious (abuse of discretion) under ERISA.
2. Whether the Board could reasonably classify Brumm’s disability as resulting from other than a football injury despite medical evidence that the underlying disabling condition originated during his NFL career and was later aggravated.

## Decision

- The Eighth Circuit reversed the district court’s summary judgment for the Plan and remanded.
- Even under deferential ERISA review, the Board’s construction had to remain within the Plan’s language and be supported by substantial evidence.
- The Board’s effective requirements (a single identifiable injury and disability occurring within a short time after leaving football) were not contained in the Plan’s text.
- The record evidence supported that Brumm’s disabling condition originated from football, and the Board’s categorical treatment of the disability as non-football-related could not be sustained on summary judgment.

## Legal Principles

- When an ERISA plan grants interpretive discretion, courts review benefit determinations for abuse of discretion, but will not uphold interpretations that conflict with the plan’s language or lack substantial record support.
- An administrator may not add eligibility conditions not stated in the plan when construing ambiguous terms.
- A disability may be “due to” a covered injury when the covered injury is a substantial causal factor, even if a later non-covered event aggravates the condition.

## Conclusion

The Eighth Circuit held that the Plan’s administrator could not deny Level 1 disability benefits by imposing extra-textual limits (such as requiring a single discrete football injury and rapid post-retirement onset) where the Plan required only that disability be due to a football injury incurred while an active player, and remanded for further proceedings under a proper interpretation.


Brumm v. Bert Bell NFL Ret. Plan, 995 F.2d 1433 (8th Cir. 1993)