Ex Parte Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.
Supreme Court of Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
The only issue presented by this petition for the writ of mandamus is whether the plaintiff is entitled to a jury trial in his action against the administrator of an ERISA-regulated employee health care benefit plan.
W.R. Edgeworth, a retired employee of LTV Steel Company, is a member of the LTV Health Care Plan ("the Plan"), a self-funded employee welfare benefit plan governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) (29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq.). MetLife is the administrator of the Plan and has discretionary authority to determine eligibility for benefits claimed under the…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. McClendonSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Beacon Theatres, Inc. v. WestoverSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
- Marlowe Blake and Pam Blake v. Unionmutual Stock Life Ins. Co. Of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1990
- Weems v. Jefferson-Pilot Life Ins. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1995
- Haywood v. Russell Corp.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1991
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ex Parte Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1996
- Midwest Security Life Insurance v. StroupIndiana Supreme Court · 2000
- Midwest Security Life Insurance v. StroupIndiana Supreme Court · 2000