Orvosh v. Program Of Group Insurance For Salaried Employees Of Volkswagen Of America, Inc., 222 F.3d 123 (3^rd Cir. 2000)-This court reversed the district court's finding that Volkswagen was arbitrary and capricious in discontinuing Orvosh's long-term disability benefits. Although there were conflicting doctor's opinions on Orvosh's level of disability, the evidence showed there were jobs which he could perform and for which he was "reasonably fitted by education, training, or experience."

UNUM found that with his vascular and pulmonary conditions, Orvosh, formerly employed as a senior chemist, could still work as a "gate attendant, surveillance system monitor, information clerk," or similar "retirement type" job. In arguing that these "retirement-type positions" were reasonably suited to Orvosh's education, training, and experience, Volkswagen relied in part upon Buchanan v. Reliance Standard Life Ins. Co., 5 F. Supp. 2d 1172 (D.Kan. 1998) and Brooks v. Protective Life Ins. Co., 883 F. Supp. 632 (M.D. Ala. 1995), aff'd, 77 F.3d 498 (11th Cir. 1996).

Apparently, the thrust of these cases is that "reasonable fit" language sets only a minimum level of qualification. It does not require that a suggested position be the job for which an employee is best suited.  The simple fact that other work options existed (without delving into what they would be) was enough for this court to conclude that Volkswagen's decision was not arbitrary and capricious.