Legal Opinion
Tingle v. Pacific Mutual Insurance
District Court, W.D. Louisiana
Decided November 18, 1993No. Civ. A. 89-0912PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON REMAND
PUTNAM, Senior District Judge.
The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit disagreed with the conclusion reached by this Court that La.R.S. 22:619 was exempt from ERISA preemption because it falls within the insurance savings clause of that Act. See: Tingle v. Pacific Mutual Insurance Company, 996 F.2d 105 (5th Cir.1993). The Court said that the statute failed to meet one of the three requirements of Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Massachusetts, 471 U.S. 724, 105 S.Ct. 2380, 85 L.Ed.2d 728 (1985) in that it did not operate to “spread the risk” of health coverage for which the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Pilot Life Insurance v. DedeauxSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. MassachusettsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- United States v. Randall & BlakeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1987
- Tingle v. Pacific Mut. Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993
- Cecil Ray Arnold v. Life Insurance Company of North AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1990
3Cited by14 opinions
- Janet B. Davies Donald Davies v. Centennial Life Insurance Company, and Dun & Bradstreet Plan Services, Inc., Jerome J. Siegel, D.D.S., Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1997
- Mary Sue Shipley v. Arkansas Blue Cross And Blue ShieldCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2003
- Shipley v. Arkansas Blue Cross & Blue ShieldCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2003
- Reynolds v. Massachusetts Casualty InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 1995
- Coots v. United Employers FederationDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1994
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.