A magistrate of the Western District of Texas recommended granting in part an ERISA plaintiff’s motion for attorneys’ fees, costs, and prejudgment interest against a health insurer following the Fifth Circuit’s reversal and rendition of judgment in favor of the plaintiff on claims for wrongful termination of eating-disorder treatment benefits and failure to process claims at the MultiPlan rate, applying out-of-district “home-market” rates for experienced ERISA health-benefits counsel through the lodestar method and finding relevant factors favored a fee award under ERISA’s discretionary fee-shifting framework in light of the insurer’s culpability, the deterrent value of fees, and the lack of merit in the insurer’s position.
