Legal Opinion

K. v. United Behavioral Health

District Court, D. Utah

Decided October 3, 2023No. 2:17-cv-01328Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH D.K. AND A.K., Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER v. Case No. 2:17-CV-01328-DAK UNITED BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AND ALCATEL-LUCENT MEDICAL Judge Dale A. Kimball EXPENSE PLAN FOR ACTIVE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES, Defendant. This matter is before the court on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g), Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 39, and 10th Cir. R. 39.2(B). The court does not believe that a hearing will significantly aid in its determination of the motion. The court, therefore, renders the following…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
  2. Blum v. StensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. Hoyt v. Robson Companies, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1993
  4. Micha v. Sun Life Assurance of Canada, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2017
  5. Buckley v. Slocum Dickson Medical GroupDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2015

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

Powered by the Exa API