In a recent case Kennedy v. Lilly Extended Disability Plan, 2015 WL 631391 (s.d.ind.2015), the court noted that although the arbitrary and capricious standard of review is more difficult than say a de novo standard of review “…it is not a euphemism for rubber-stamp.” Insurers have become more aggressive in denying welfare benefit claims including both life and long term disability claims. When a court’s review provides too much deference insurers will take advantage of that fact and deny more claims. When too much deference is provided, it is equivalent of “rubber-stamping” the insurer’s decision. Such is not to be countenanced as the Kennedy court from Indiana recognized especially give that the insurer is operating from a conflict of interest-that is paying benefits out of its own pocket. The profit motive can take precedence over the fiduciary duties of fairly paying claims, when too much deference is given to claim’s decisions.