Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
11 opinions for “Thomas v. AMEC Holdings, Inc. Long-Term Disability Plan”
ORDER THOMAS S. ZILLY, District Judge. THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Parties’ cross motions for summary judgment, docket nos. 14 and 18. The Court has reviewed the motions, opposition, and replies, and all pleadings related thereto, and now enters the following Order. I. Background Plaintiff David Baxter was diagnosed with early stage prostate
Martin v. Aetna Life Insurance Co.public domain
RULING AND ORDER Re: BENCH TRIAL HONORABLE RONALD S.W. LEW, Senior U.S. District Judge On November 15,2016, the above matter commenced in a bench trial before this Court. Plaintiff Greg Martin (“Plaintiff’) filed this Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) disability benefits action against Defendant Aetna Life Insurance Company (“Aetna”), Federal Express Corporation Short Term Disabili
Porco v. Prudential Insurance Co. of Americapublic domain
682 F.Supp.2d 1057 (2010) Frank PORCO, Plaintiff, v. The PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA and Superior Industries International, Inc. Long Term Disability Plan, Defendants. Case No. CV 08-01538. United States District Court, C.D. California. January 19, 2010. *1060 Brent Dorian Brehm, Corinne Chandler, Kantor and Kantor LL
Morgan v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co.public domain
OPINION AND ORDER BENJAMIN H. SETTLE, United States District Judge This matter comes before the Court on the merits of Plaintiff Trade D. Morgan’s (“Morgan”) claim against Defendant Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company (“Hartford”) for wrongful denial of benefits under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001, et seq. (“ERISA”). Dkt. 1. The Court, having c
Bradford v. Life Insurance Co. of North Americapublic domain
ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT THOMAS O. RICE, District Judge. BEFORE THE COURT are the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment (ECF Nos. 20 & 23). These matters were heard with oral argument on September 4, 2014. Lawrence J. Kuznetz appeared on behalf of the Plaintiff. Michael Reilly appeared telephonically on behalf of Defendant. The Court has reviewed the briefing and the record and f
Browe v. CTC Corp.public domain
From December 6-8, 2017 and March 5-6, 2018, the court conducted a bench trial. On March 26, 2018, the parties submitted supplemental briefing, at which time the court took the matter under advisement. Patrick J. Bernal, Esq. and John D. Stasny, Esq. represent Plaintiffs. A. Jay Kenlan, Esq. represents Defendants. I. Findings of Fact. Based upon the preponderance of the evidence, the court
Reetz v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co.public domain
JAMES L. ROBART, United States District Judge I. INTRODUCTION Before the court are Plaintiff Kristen Reetz's and Defendant Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company's ("Hartford") cross motions for judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52, (Pl. Mot. (Dkt. # 29) ); (Def. Mot. (Dkt. # 31).) Each party opposes the other's motion for judgment. (Pl. Resp. (Dkt. # 33); Def. Resp. (Dkt. # 32).)
Sidlo v. Kaiser Permanente Insurance Co.public domain
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT, AND SUA SPONTE DISMISSING COUNT VI WITHOUT PREJUDICE Alan C. Kay Sr., United States District Judge For
Delaney v. Prudential Insurance Co. of Americapublic domain
*1218OPINION AND ORDER MOSMAN, District Judge. On November 17, 2014, Magistrate Judge Stewart issued her Findings and Recommendations (“F & R”) [39], recommending that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [25] be DENIED and Plaintiffs Motion for Judgment on the Pleading [26] should be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. No objectio
Shaw v. Life Insurance Co. of North Americapublic domain
FINDING OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW MARGARET M. MORROW, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Plaintiff Stephanie Shaw filed this action on October 14, 2014, against Life Insurance Company of North America (“LINA”).1 Shaw alleges that she was denied long-term disability benefits to which she was entitled under a disability benefit plan (the “Plan”) established by her former employer
Abarca v. Franklin County Water Districtpublic domain
761 F.Supp.2d 1007 (2011) ABARCA, Raul Valencia, et al., Plaintiffs, v. FRANKLIN COUNTY WATER DISTRICT, Defendants. No. 1:07-CV-0388-OWW-DLB. United States District Court, E.D. California. January 5, 2011. *1011 Brett Lee Runyon, Heather Sharon Cohen, Michael Edward Lehman, Marderosian, Runyon, Cercone, Lehman & Armo, Fresno,