Blankenship v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
District Court, N.D. Alabama
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
WILLIAM M. ACKER, JR., District Judge.
Plaintiff, Frank Blankenship (“Blankenship”), invoking 29 U.S.C. § 1132, the enforcement provision of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), claims that he has been wrongfully denied long-term disability (“LTD”) benefits by defendant, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”). MetLife counterclaims, seeking to offset benefits paid to Blankenship by any Social Security Disability Income (“SSDI”) received by him. Before the court are Blankenship’s and MetLife’s cross-motions for judgment as a matter of law.…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. GlennSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- Black & Decker Disability Plan v. NordSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Fred Brown v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Alabama, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1990
- Montour v. Hartford Life & Accident InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Marcia Williams v. BellSouth TelecommunicationsCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2004
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Blankenship v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2011
- Howard v. Hartford Life & Accident InsuranceDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · 2011
- Stephens v. CITATION CORP.District Court, N.D. Alabama · 2010
- Shanklin v. United Mine Workers of America Combined Benefit FundDistrict Court, N.D. Alabama · 2023