Galenski v. Ford Motor Co. Pension Plan
District Court, E.D. Michigan
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
ZATKOFF, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs “Motion for Summary Judgment” (Docket # 6). 1 Defendant jointly filed a response to Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment and a Counter-Motion for Affirmation of ERISA Administra 1 tive Decision (Docket # 8). Plaintiff has filed a reply to Defendant’s response and Counter-Motion and Defendant has filed a sur-reply. The Court finds that the facts and legal arguments pertinent to Plaintiffs Motion and Defendant’s Counter-Motion are adequately presented in the parties’ papers, and the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Bob G. Wilkins v. Baptist Healthcare System, Inc. Life Insurance Company of North AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
- Boggs v. BoggsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Connie M. Miller v. Metropolitan Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
- Arthur Fallick v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company Nationwide Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Galenski v. Ford Motor Co. Pension PlanCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008