David Day v. At&t Disability Income Plan
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM *
David Day appeals the district court’s orders granting in part and denying in part his motions for attorneys’ fees in his action filed against the AT & T Disability Income Plan (“the Plan”) under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm. Because the par- . ties are familiar with the factual and legal history of the case, we need not recount it here.
“We review for abuse of discretion a district court’s decision to award or deny attorney’s fees in an ERISA action, as well as a…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Welch v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- National Ass'n of Concerned Veterans v. Secretary of DefenseCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
- Federal Trade Commission v. Minneapolis-Honeywell Regulator Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
- George Cann v. Carpenters' Pension Trust Fund for Northern CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Haddad v. SMG Long Term Disability PlanDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2021
- In re: SoCAL SLEEP CENTERS, LLCUnited States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
- Mondragon Martinez v. Vega ContrerasDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2024
- Smith v. Aetna Life Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2020
- Villasenor v. Community Child Care Council of Santa Clara County, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2021