Legal Opinion
State Ex Rel. Nee v. Unumprovident Corp.
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 13, 2006No. B183487PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ARMSTRONG, J.
Linda Nee and John Metz, acting on behalf of plaintiff, the State of California, appeal the dismissal of the complaint brought under Insurance Code 1 section 1871.7 following defendant Unumprovident Corporation’s successful demurrer to this qui tarn action. The trial court ruled that the statutes upon which plaintiff’s case was brought do not apply to the defendant’s claims handling practices. We agree, and so affirm the trial court.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
This is a qui tarn action brought under section 1871.7 on behalf of the State of California. The complaint alleged that…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Lungren v. DeukmejianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1988
- Applied Equipment Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1994
- DaFonte v. Up-Right, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1992
- Lakin v. Watkins Associated IndustriesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Morris v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Poet v. State Air Resources BoardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
- People ex rel. Strathmann v. Acacia Research Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2012
- State Ex Rel. Metz v. Ccc Information Services, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2007
- Sanchez v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Interinsurance Exchange of Automobile Club v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.