Legal Opinion
Monast v. Johnson & Johnson
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided January 22, 2010No. Civil Action 08-11813-RGSPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
STEARNS, District Judge.
Plaintiff Pauline Monast brought this action pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., seeking non-income, long-term disability (LTD) benefits 1 from defendant Johnson & Johnson. 2 Cross-motions for summary judgment were filed on October 2, 2009. A hearing on the motions was held on December 7, 2009.
BACKGROUND
The relevant facts are undisputed. Monast was hired on July 30, 2001, by Cod-man & Shurtleff, Inc., a medical device provider acquired by Johnson & Johnson.…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. GlennSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Leahy v. Raytheon CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2002
- Michael F. Terry v. Bayer Corporation and Bayer Corporation Disability PlanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
- Doyle v. Paul Revere Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1998
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Leonard v. General Electric Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2016
- Lyman v. Unum GroupDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2019
- Lyman v. Unum Grp.District Court, District of Columbia · 2019