Cases

ORDER PATRICK J. SCHILTZ, District Judge. Timothy Davidson purchased accidental-death-and-dismemberment coverage under a group insurance policy issued by defendant Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company (“Hartford”). A few months later, Davidson died after he drank a great deal of alcohol while taking prescription pain medication. Plaintiffs Patricia Bolin (Davidson’s mother) and Pamela Miller (Davidso

*1268 ORDER MARCIA MORALES HOWARD, District Judge. This case, brought pursuant to the Employment Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), involves a plan administrator’s termination of a plan claimant’s long term disability benefits. It is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment. Specifically pending are Defendan

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Dkt. # 22] AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT [Dkt. #25] VANESSA L. BRYANT, District Judge. I. Introduction The Plaintiff, Barbara Carroll (“Carroll”), brings this action against the Defendant Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company (“Hartford”) pursuant to the Employee Retir

AMOS L. MAZZANT, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE The above-entitled and numbered civil action was heretofore referred to United States Magistrate Judge Caroline M. Craven pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On January 31, 2019, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation, finding for Plaintiff under recommended fi

743 F.Supp.2d 569 (2010) Geraldine B. HILL, Plaintiff, v. HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. Case No. 1:10CV00022. United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Abingdon Division. October 14, 2010. *570 Paul G. Beers, Glenn, Feldmann, Darby & Goodlatte, Roanoke, VA, for Plaintiff. Kevin W. Holt, Ge

188 F.Supp.2d 1135 (2002) Estate of Bruce A. HAAG, Plaintiff, v. HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. No. Civ. 01-1725(DSD/JMM). United States District Court, D. Minnesota. March 14, 2002. *1136 Daniel B. Honsey, Kraft, Walser, Nelson, Hettig & Honsey, Hutchinson, MN, for Plaintiff. Eric C. Tostrud,

Lavine, Beach and Bear, Js. LAVINE, BEACH and BEAR, Js. *73 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. FACTS...548 A. Factual and Procedural History...548 B. Issues on Appeal...553

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER RUBEN CASTILLO, District Judge. Hartford Fire Insurance Company (“Hartford”) brings this action for a declaratory judgment pursuant to the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201 et seq., against Defendants Larry Taylor, Todd Gagliano, American Fire Assurance Company, and Jeffrey Mattsson, seeking a declaration that Hartford owes no coverage under t

320 Ga. 624 FINAL COPY S23G1029. WASSERMAN v. FRANKLIN COUNTY. PINSON, Justice. The Georgia Constitution grants Georgia courts the judicial power. This power allows courts to resolve controversies about the relative rights and obligations of the parties before us, and to enter judgments that bind the parties to those decisions. The limits of this power are enforced in part through the doctrine of standing, which imposes threshold requirements that a party must meet to m

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2020-CT-01181-SCT JEREMY THORNHILL v. WALKER-HILL ENVIRONMENTAL AND ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF ILLINOIS ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI DATE OF JUDGMENT: 09/11/2020 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ANTHONY ALAN MOZINGO TRIAL COURT ATTORNEYS: NATHAN L. BURROW AMANDA HILL FRITZ OLIVIA YEN TRUONG

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON July 21, 2009 Session1 SHELBY COUNTY HEALTH CARE CORPORATION, D/B/A REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER v. JOHN BAUMGARTNER, ELIZABETH BAUMGARTNER, A/K/A DARAY BAUMGARTNER, NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, AND HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY An Appeal from the Circuit Court for

[Cite as Latimore v. Hartford Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 2012-Ohio-447.] COURT OF APPEALS STARK COUNTY, OHIO FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LILLIAN LOUISE LATIMORE : JUDGES: JULIET LATIMORE : : Hon. Patricia A. Delaney, P.J. Plaintiff-Appell

SUSAN L. CARNEY, Circuit Judge: Section 5-335 of the New York General Obligations Law provides that personal injury settlements “shall be conclusively presumed” not to include “any compensation for the cost of health care services, loss of earnings or other economic loss[es]” that “have been or are obligated to be paid or reimbursed by an insurer.” N.Y. Gen. Oblig. Law § 5-335(a). When section 5-335 is applied, it effectivel

201 F.Supp.2d 506 (2002) Valerie JACKSON v. HARTFORD LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANY No. CIV. CCB-01-2496. United States District Court, D. Maryland. May 15, 2002. *507 *508 Aaron Robert Caruso, Curtis Perry Abod, Jacobs Abod and Caruso, Rockville, MD, for Plaintiff. Charles R. Bacha

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ANDRÉ BIROTTE JR., District Judge. Pending before the Court is the Employment Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) action concerning the termination of Plaintiff Kanika Bledsoe’s (“Plaintiff’) long-term disability (“LTD”) benefits, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(B). (See Complaint, Dkt. No. 1.) Plaintiff seeks reinstatement of the LTD benefits u

BARRON, Circuit Judge. The Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) governs employee benefit plans. 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. Among other things, the statute permits beneficiaries to go to court to challenge their plan’s decision to deny or cut off their benefits. Id. § 1132(a)(1)(B). Before filing suit, however, beneficiaries

JUSTICE GREIMAN delivered the opinion of the court: This declaratory judgment action reaches us for the second time. In our previous decision, we held that, under California law, defendant Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, the insurer, had a duty to defend plaintiff WC. Richards Company, Inc., the insured, in a matter

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-5526-15T1 A-0033-16T1 THERESA WEAR and RICHARD WEAR, Plaintiffs/Intervenors- Appellants, APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION v.

Docket Nos. 97481, 98309 cons.–Agenda 15–November 2004. LULA HOBBS, Appellee, v. HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE MIDWEST, Appellant.–LEE ANN ANHEUSER et al ., Appellees, v. PRUDENTIAL PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant. Opinion filed January 21, 2005. JUSTICE FITZGERALD delivered the opinion of the court: At issue in these cons

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MO- ' TION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT' AND GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ' JUDGMENT ‘ ' RICARDO S. MARTINEZ, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the parties’ Motions for Summary Judgment. Dkts. #20 and #22. The parties seek judgments as a matter of law with respect to coverage under an Acci