Merklin v. Liberty Life Assurance Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBea, Circuit Judge
I concur in the majority’s affirmance of the denial of Merklin’s motion for summary judgment. I respectfully dissent, however, from the majority’s affirmance of the grant of Liberty’s motion for summary judgment in this case. Regardless whether the district court should have reviewed the case under a de novo or an abuse of discretion standard, summary judgment for the defendants was improperly granted.
I. Coverage
Merklin met her burden to prove she was disabled as defined under the policy, thus invoking coverage. Sabatino v. Liberty Life Assur. Co. of Boston, 286 F.Supp.2d 1222, 1223…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Mongeluzo v. Baxter Travenol Long Term Disability Benefit PlanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
- Friedrich v. Intel Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Sabatino v. Liberty Life Assurance Co. of BostonDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2003
- Ellis v. Egghead Software Short-Term & Long-Term Disability PlansDistrict Court, E.D. Washington · 1999
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.