Legal Opinion

Ordway v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.

District Court, S.D. California

Decided August 21, 2007No. 3:06-cr-00486PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT and GRANTING IN PART MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION [doc. # 18]

M. JAMES LORENZ, District Judge.

Defendant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife” or “defendant”) moves for summary judgment or in the alternative, for partial summary judgment [doc. # 18]. The motion is fully briefed and has been submitted without oral argument. Having carefully considered the matters presented, the Court enters the following decision.

Factual and Procedural Background

David Ordway (“Ordway” or “plaintiff’) was the general manager of an automobile…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  2. Raymond E. ANDREWS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Donna E. SHALALA, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
  3. Reddick v. ChaterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
  4. Rex T. KEARNEY, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
  5. Mary Anne Bendixen v. Standard Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. James v. AT & T West Disability Benefits ProgramDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2014
  2. Patrick v. Hewlett-Packard Co. Employee Benefits Organization Income Protection PlanDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2009

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API