Cases

NANNETTE JOLIVETTE BROWN, CHIEF JUDGE This is an action brought by Plaintiff Paula Le ("Plaintiff") for denial of long-term disability benefits under an employee welfare benefit plan ("the plan"), written through her employer, the Opelousas General Health System ("OGHS"), and insured by Defendant Unum Life Insurance Company *645of America ("Def

MEMORANDUM CURTIS L. COLLIER, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the Court is a motion to remand filed by Plaintiff Gregory P. Gooden. (Doc. 12.) Plaintiff argues that the Court does not have jurisdiction over this action because the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001, et seq. (“ERISA”), does not apply to the insur-*468

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER RICHARD G. KOPF, Senior District Judge. This matter is before me on Defendant UNUM Life Insurance Company of America’s (“UNUM”) Motion for Judicial Determination of ERISA Application and Preemption. (Filing 20.) For the reasons discussed below, I will construe UNUM’s motion as a motion for partial summary judgment and grant it. BACKGROUND On

465 F.Supp.2d 901 (2006) Natalie S. FINCH and David L. Paul, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,[1] Plaintiffs, v. UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Defendant. Civil No. 06-296 ADM/RLE. United States District Court, D. Minnesota. December 18, 2006. *902 John J. Curi, Esq., Curi Law Office,

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit ____________ Nos. 05-2001 & 05-2165 WILLIAM C. DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, Cross-Appellee, v. UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, and REGAL-BELOIT CORPORATION LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN, De

55 F.Supp.2d 269 (1999) Barbara LAUDER, Plaintiff, v. FIRST UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and Coach Stores, Inc., Defendants. No. 98 Civ. 3164(BDP). United States District Court, S.D. New York. July 2, 1999. *270 Peter G. Eikenberry, New York City, for plaintiff. Evan L. Gordon, New York City, for defendant First Unum. <

ENTRY ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT WILLIAM T. LAWRENCE, District Judge. This cause is before the Court on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment. The motions are fully briefed, and the Court, being duly advised, DENIES the Defendants’ motion and GRANTS the *980Plaintiffs motion for the reasons and to the extent set f

615 F.3d 946 (2010) Antoine KHOURY, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. GROUP HEALTH PLAN, INC., Defendant, *947 ReliaStar Life Insurance Company, Defendant/Appellee. No. 09-3276. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. Submitted: June 15, 2010. Filed: August 10, 2010. *949 R

573 F.3d 383 (2009) Joel HELFMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. GE GROUP LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY; Genworth Life and Health Insurance Company; and Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada, Defendants-Appellees. No. 08-2168. United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. Argued: June 18, 2009. Decided and Filed: July 24, 2009. *385<

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT DAVID AUSTELL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. No. 96-1974 RAYMOND JAMES & ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED, Defendant-Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-95-3983-6-3) Argued: May 7, 1997 Decided: July 22, 1997 Before WILKINSON, Chief Judge, MICHAEL, Circuit Ju

RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 File Name: 09a0265p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT _________________ X - JOEL HELFMAN,

*6Justice Ginsburg delivered the opinion of the Court. This case presents a question on which federal courts have divided: Does the working owner of a business (here, the sole shareholder and president of a professional corporation) qualify as a “participant” in a pension plan covered by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA or Act), 88

MANION, Circuit Judge. While working at Regal-Beloit Corporation, William Davis participated in the company’s long-term disability plan, which is administered by Unum Life Insurance Company of America. After Regal-Beloit fired Davis, he sought benefits under the plan. Unum awarded Davis benefits for a mental disability but denied benefits for a physical disability. Davis sued. T

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge COPENHAVER wrote the opinion, in which Chief Judge WILKINSON and Judge MICHAEL joined. OPINION COPENHAVER, District Judge: The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court erred in determining that the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA), 29 U.S.C.A. § 1161(a), does not re

OBERDORFER, Senior District Judge. Plaintiff-appellant, Michael J.M. Wright, appeals the district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees, R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co. Group Benefits Plan, and Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company (“Hartford”). Wright alleged that Hartford’s termination of his short-term disability benefits, and its failure to gr

348 F.3d 417 Mary B. GUNNELLS; William A. Gunnells; Tele Tech Corporation; Cynthia Mullinax; W & W Truck and Tractor Company, Incorporated; Jerry Freeman; AAA Transmissions, Incorporated; Pamela B. Robertson; Avionics/Seaonics International, Incorporated; James E. Cassleman; Larry Strickland; Brenda Workman; Helen Clark; Bobby F. Buchanan; Joanne Buchanan; Brian Hansen; James E. Wise; John N. Stanley; Daniel L. Driggers; Brenda Vowels; David J.

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR DISCOVERY SOROKIN, District Judge. The plaintiff, Elizabeth Wilson (‘Wilson”), filed a complaint seeking a declaration that she .is entitled to long term disability (“LTD”) benefits under an employee benefit plan sponsored and administered by her prior employer, Pharmerica Corp., which is administered and insured in part by Aetna Life Insurance Company (“Aetna”).

SUMMARY ORDER Plaintiffs-appellants Patrick Hannan, Dawn Lemieux, Nicole Groomes, and Peggy Horn (together, “plaintiffs”) appeal from the March 29, 2016 judgment of the district court (Bryant, J.) dismissing their claims against defendants-appellees Family Dollar Stores Inc., Family Dollar Stores Inc. Group Insurance Plan, and Plan Administrators (together, “Family Dollar “), and Hartford Financial Services, Inc. (“Hartford”) u

AMY BERMAN JACKSON, United States District Judge Plaintiff Gary Anthony brought this action against defendants District Lodge 1, a union affiliated with the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers National Pension Fund (the "Fund"). Compl. [Dkt. # 1] at 1-2. He alleges that defendants violated the terms of the Plan and breached their fiducia

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 25a0030p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ DEREK KRAMER, │ Plaintiff-Appellant, │