Legal Opinion
Frascona v. Minnesota Mutual Life Insurance
District Court, N.D. Georgia
Decided December 1, 1998No. Civ.A. 197-CV595-TWTPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
THRASH, District Judge.
This is an action seeking to recover benefits under a disability policy issued by the Defendant. It is before the Court on the Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration [Doc. 34] of the Order [Doc. 33] denying the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment [Doc. 18]. A motion for reconsideration should be granted if it is necessary to correct a clear error or to prevent manifest injustice. In this case, the Court is persuaded that the Motion for Reconsideration should be granted to correct a clear error. The Order denying the Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hipp v. Fidelity Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance v. DeanCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1931
- Dean v. Northwestern Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Georgia · 1932
- Lloyd v. Ætna Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1935
- McClain v. Provident Life & Accident InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1941
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Milton J. Eichacker v. The Paul Revere Life Insurance Company, and Unum ProvidentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- Milton J. Eichacker v. The Paul Revere Life Insurance Company, and Unum ProvidentCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
- White v. New York Life InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. Georgia · 2008