Legal Opinion
Hamma v. Intel Corp.
District Court, E.D. California
Decided March 23, 2009No. 2:07-cv-01795PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR., District Judge.
Defendants Intel Corporation, Intel Corporation Long Term Disability Plan, Intel Disability Appeals Committee (collectively “Intel”), and Matrix Absence Management (“Matrix”) seek summary judgment on Plaintiffs claim under 29 U.S.C. § 1132(a)(1)(b) (“ERISA”) for long term disability (“LTD”) benefits. Plaintiff opposes the motion and requests in her Opposition brief that summary judgment be granted in her favor. Plaintiffs motion has not been duly noticed for hearing and is denied on that ground. The parties dispute whether Defendants abused their…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Black & Decker Disability Plan v. NordSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Abatie v. Alta Health & Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Richard Atwood v. Newmont Gold Co., Inc., a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Mary Anne Bendixen v. Standard Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Ervin B. Madden v. Itt Long Term Disability Plan for Salaried Employees Federal Electric CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Thompson v. INSURANCE AND BENEFITS TRUST/COMMITTEE PEACE OFFICERS RESEARCH ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIADistrict Court, E.D. California · 2009