Cases

444 F.Supp.2d 1282 (2006) Phillip W. COWART and Annemie Cowart, Plaintiffs v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant No. 5:04 CV 312 CAR. United States District Court, M.D. Georgia, Macon Division. August 8, 2006. *1283 *1284 *1285

358 F.3d 307 Robert S. EVANS, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellee. No. 03-1065. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Argued: December 4, 2003. Decided: February 10, 2004. ARGUED: Charles Hardenbergh Osterhoudt, Osterhoudt, Prillaman, Natt

398 F.Supp.2d 494 (2005) Jennifer Elaine HALL, Plaintiff, v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and General Electric Company, Administrator, GE Life, Disability, and Medical Plan Defendant. No. 7:05 CV 304. United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Roanoke Division. November 17, 2005. *495 Susan A. Waddell, Wooten Hart PL

384 F.Supp.2d 894 (2005) Vicki M. CLARK, Plaintiff, v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. No. 1:04CV1330(JCC). United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Alexandria Division. July 6, 2005. *895 Richard Dennis Carter, Carter & Coleman, Alexandria, VA, for Plaintiff. Eric W. Schwartz, Troutman Sanders LLP,

312 F.Supp.2d 786 (2004) Daris STANLEY, Plaintiff. v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al. Defendants. No. Civ.A. 3:03CV381. United States District Court, E.D. Virginia, Richmond Division. January 29, 2004. *787 *788 Patricia A. Smith, Alexandria, VA, for Plaintiff. Eric W. Schwa

PER CURIAM. Nancy C. Martin appeals the district court’s order denying her civil action alleging a claim under the Employment Retirement Income Security Act. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. See Martin v. Metropolitan Life Ins., Co., No. CV-02-215-02, 2002 WL 32072618 (E.D.Va. Sept. 23, 2002). We dispense with oral argument

251 F.Supp.2d 107 (2003) Margaret HUNTER, Plaintiff, v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al. Defendants. No. CIV.A. 02-0137(ESH). United States District Court, District of Columbia. March 6, 2003. *108 Henry E. Weil, Belli, Weil & Grozebean, P.C., Rockville, MD, for Plaintiff. Mary Catherine Zinsner, Troutman Sa

BOUDIN, Chief Judge. This appeal grows out of a lengthy and complex dispute over commercial liability insurance coverage. At odds are the insured, Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. (“MetLife”) 1 and one of its insurers, Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. (“Liberty”). MetLife claims that Liberty had a duty to defend and indemnify

53 F.Supp.2d 529 (1999) LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. No. Civ.A. 98-10643-REK. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. June 17, 1999. *530 Mark M. Whitney, Warner & Stackpole, Boston, MA, James E. Harvey, Kevin D. McElaney, O'Malley and Harvey, Boston,

SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs, former General Electric Company (“GE”) employees who became disabled *1374while at GE, brought suit under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 1001-1461 (West 1985 & Supp.1995), to recover insurance benefits allegedly due them. At issue is the proper interpretation of

681 F.Supp.2d 1262 (2010) Shirley A. PURNEY, Plaintiff, v. RELIASTAR LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and The Meredith Corporation Voluntary Life Insurance Plan, Defendants. The Meredith Corporation Voluntary Life Insurance Plan, Third-Party Plaintiff, v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Third-Party Defendant. The Meredith Corporation Voluntary Life Insurance Plan, Cross-Claimant, v. Reliastar Life Insurance Company, Cross-Defen

SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge. Debtor, Terex Corporation (“Terex”), appeals the district court’s judgment affirming the bankruptcy court’s order directing Terex to pay Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“Metropolitan”) interest on a claim for unpaid post-petition insurance premiums. For all of the reasons that follow, we AFFIRM. I.

PER CURIAM: Jacqueline Moore appeals the district court’s order granting Defendants’ motions to dismiss and for summary judgment and the court’s order denying her motion to reconsider. We have reviewed the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal and conclude there is no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Moore v. Life Ins. Co. of N. Am., 708 F.Supp.2d 597 (N.D.W.V

2022 WI App 45 COURT OF APPEALS OF WISCONSIN PUBLISHED OPINION Case No.: 2021AP635 †Petition for Review filed Complete Title of Case: PEPSI-COLA METROPOLITAN BOTTLING COMPANY, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, V. EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COM

708 F.Supp.2d 597 (2010) Jacqueline MOORE, individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Keith Karwacki, deceased, Plaintiff, v. LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA, a foreign corporation, Cigna Corporation d/b/a Cigna Group Insurance, a foreign corporation and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, a foreign corporation, Defendants, and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, a foreign corporation, Counter Claimant, v. Jacqueline

HULL, Circuit Judge: In this case, we must determine whether plaintiff Don Witt’s lawsuit seeking to recover disability benefits allegedly due from May 1997 to the present is barred by the applicable statute of limitations and, if so, whether the defendants waived that statute-of-limitations .defense. After careful review of the record and the briefs, and with the benefit of ora

298 S.C. 404 (1989) 380 S.E.2d 858 UNIVERSAL UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent v. METROPOLITAN PROPERTY AND LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Morris Motors, Inc., Richard J. Pulcino, and Patricia Brockington, Defendants, of whom Richard J. Pulcino is Appellant. Appeal of Richard J. PULCINO. 1339 Court of Appeals of South Carolina. Heard April 12, 1989.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER KEETON, District Judge. Introduction Now pending before this court are: (1) Joint 6(b) Motion of Plaintiffs James E. Nabors et al. and Benita Battles for Enlargement of Time or, in the Alternative, 60(b)(1) Motion for Relief from Judgment (Docket No. 285, filed July 31, 2001) with accompanying memorandum (Docket No. 286, filed August 6, 2001);

553 F.3d 922 (2008) Eric SANDERS; Carrie L. Sanders, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA; Vanguard Health Management, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. No. 07-51216. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. December 29, 2008. *923 Charles Darby Riley (argued), San Antonio, TX, Thomas H. Crofts, Jr. (a

73 F.3d 1372 Mary Ellen LAKE; Calvin Pauley; Genevieve Blanton; AnnaMink; Vestil Perry; Russell Buffington, and allother persons similarly situated,Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY and General ElectricCompany, Defendants-Appellees. No. 94-3852. United States Court of Appeals,Sixth Circuit. Argued Sept. 22, 1995.