Sconiers v. First Unum Life Insurance
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER PARTIALLY GRANTING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BY MORGAN STANLEY AND THE PLAN, DENYING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BY UNUM, AND ALLOWING LIMITED DISCOVERY
WILLIAM ALSUP, District Judge.
INTRODUCTION
In this ERISA action, all defendants move for summary judgment. Plaintiff opposes the motions and requests leave to take discovery. For the reasons stated below, one motion for summary judgment is Granted in part and Denied in part, the other motion for summary judgment is Denied, and limited discovery will be allowed.
STATEMENT
Plaintiff Michele P. Sconiers was hired as a level-two banking…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. GlennSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- CIGNA Corp. v. AmaraSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Joan Hangarter v. Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company, and the Paul Revere Life Insurance Company Unumprovident Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Nolan v. Heald CollegeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Echague v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2014
- Colaco v. ASIC Advantage Simplified Pension PlanDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2014
- Bush v. Liberty Life Assurance Co.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
- Coffey v. Hartford Life & Accident Insurance Co.District Court, W.D. Virginia · 2017
- Zisk v. Gannett Co. Income Protection PlanDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2014
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.