Cases

E. GRADY JOLLY, Circuit Judge: This ERISA case presents an appeal of a denial of benefits claimed by Gena Baker under a life insurance policy covering her deceased husband, Keith Baker. Gena Baker and Burlington Resources Inc., Keith Baker’s employer (who paid the benefits to Gena Baker acquiring her right to the proceeds of this action), sued Metropolitan Life Insurance Company for these life insurance benefits. The complai

ORDER RAYMOND P. MOORE, United States District Judge This matter concerns Plaintiff Marilyn O. Shafer’s claim for life insurance benefits allegedly due under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. *1248This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs motion for partial s

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON CROSS MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT JOHN R. TUNHEIM, District Judge. This case involves a dispute over a former employee’s access to benefits under a supplemental long-term disability insurance plan. Plaintiff Richard Lanpher was an employee at Merrill Lynch (succeeded by Defendant Bank of America, referred to as “Merrill Lynch” throughout), through which he was automatical

Burt F. Baker appeals from a summary judgment entered by the Montgomery Circuit Court in favor of defendants Metropolitan Life Insurance Company ("MetLife") and Gary Baldridge. We affirm. I. Facts and Procedural History In October 1989, Baker purchased a whole-life insurance policy from MetLife. In his complaint, Baker alleges that Baldridge, MetLife's agent who sold Baker the policy, represented to Baker that after he paid the annual premium on the p

5 N.Y.3d 561 (2005) 841 N.E.2d 742 807 N.Y.S.2d 583 NEIL A. GOLDMAN, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, Appellant, v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. ALLEN S. FRANCO et al., Appellants, v. THE GUARDIAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Respondent. MICHAEL KATZ, Appellant, v. AMERICAN MAYFLOWER LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK, Responde

258 S.W.3d 67 (2008) METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. Angel LANE, Sharmae Young, Sylvia Young, Ted Foster & Sons, Inc., d/b/a White House Chapel North, Respondents, and Angela Jeans, Appellant. No. ED 89948. Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five. May 13, 2008. Joseph Robbins, St. Louis, MO, for appellant. Matthew

MEMORANDUM ** Appellant Peggy Hawkins-Dean was employed by Robert Half International (“RHI”) and was enrolled in RHI’s Long-Term Disability Benefits Plan (“the Plan”). The Plan is funded by a group policy issued by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”) to RHI and is governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq. This matter was origin

190 F.Supp.2d 911 (2001) Patsy BLACKWELL, et al. Plaintiffs v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY F/K/A/ New England Mutual Life Insurance Company; Fulton A. Jordan, Jr. D/B/A/ Jordan & Associates, et al. Defendants No. CIV.A. 301CV523WS. United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Jackson Division. December 28, 2001. *912

164 F.Supp.2d 830 (2001) John F. PETERS, et al. Plaintiffs v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, f/k/a New England Mutual Life Insurance Company, et al. Defendants No. 5:00CV321. United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Western Division. September 14, 2001. *831 Alfred Lee Felder, Alfred Lee Felder, Attorney, McComb, MS,

11 McKAY, Judge. STATEMENT OF THE CASE Charles Powell filed suit for personal injuries allegedly sustained when he was *115exposed to asbestos from 1955 to 1962 while he was employed by Exxon (formerly Humble Oil) as a roustabout. Plaintiff alleged Jones Act seaman status as a member of the crew aboard “LST”s, which are converted tank landing ships

MERRITT, Circuit Judge, dissenting. I would adhere to the panel’s interpretation with respect to the application to group health and disability insurance policies of Titles III and IV of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12182, 12201. The panel’s reasoning is fully set out in its published decision, Parker v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 99 F.3d 181 (6th Cir.1996). It reaches the conc

Reversed and Remanded and Memorandum Opinion filed February 2, 2021. In The Fourteenth Court of Appeals NO. 14-19-00155-CV METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY AND BRIGHTHOUSE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellants V. RSL FUNDING, LLC, RSL SPECIAL-IV, LTD., AND MARLA MATZ FELDMAN, Appellees On Appeal from the County Civ

ORDER TIMOTHY J. CORRIGAN, United States District Judge This ERISA case is before the Court on Defendant Citigroup, Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss Count II of Plaintiffs Complaint (Doc. 29). On August 12, 2016, the assigned United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 51) recommending that Citigroup’s motion be denied in its entirety. On August 26, 2016, Citigroup filed objections

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER SIDNEY A. FITZWATER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Plaintiff Charlize Marie Baker (“Baker”) — who is undergoing the process of gender transition from male to female— sues defendant Aetna Life Insurance Company (“Aetna”), seeking to recover short-term disability benefits under an ERISA 1 qualified short-term disability benefits plan (“STD Plan”) followi

131 F.Supp.2d 670 (2001) CGU LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, and CGU Annuity Service Corporation, v. METROPOLITAN MORTGAGE & SECURITIES CO., INC., Woodbridge Sterling Capital LLC, and Lester E. Lytle, Jr. No. CIV.A.00-CV-0271. United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania. February 2, 2001. *671

20-3148, 20-3804, 21-1 Jacqueline Fisher v. Aetna Life Insurance Company UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT ____________________ August Term, 2021 (Argued: October 20, 2021 Decided: April 22, 2022) Docket Nos. 20-3148, 20-3804, 21-1 ____________________ JACQUELINE FISHER,

BOGGS, Chief Judge. This case presents the questions of whether an ERISA plan’s determination to deny benefits was arbitrary and capricious and, if it was, what remedy this court should order. Patricia Elliott submitted a claim for long-term disability benefits to the administrator of her employer’s employee benefit plan, Metropolitan Life (“MetLife”). MetLife denied Elliott’s c

692 F.Supp.2d 775 (2010) John LANIER, Plaintiff, v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. Case No. 08-11842. United States District Court, E.D. Michigan, Southern Division. March 9, 2010. *778 Greg M. Liepshutz, Levine, Benjamin, Southfield, MI, for Plaintiff. David M. Davis, Hardy, Lewis, Birmingham, MI, for Def

107 Mich. App. 447 (1981) 309 N.W.2d 550 SMITH v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. Docket No. 51474. Michigan Court of Appeals. Decided March 12, 1981. Baker & Selby, for plaintiff. Rubenstein, Pruchnicki & Chittle, for defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. David M. Davis, for defendant

*260 OPINION KAREN NELSON MOORE, Circuit Judge. In 2002, Plaintiff Russell D. Conger filled out an on-line application and purchased a long-term care insurance policy-under the Federal Long-Term Care Insurance Program (“FLTCIP”). When he sought to collect benefits, Metropolitan Lif