Legal Opinion
Jamie F. v. UnitedHealthcare Insurance Company
District Court, N.D. California
Decided July 23, 2020No. 4:19-cv-01111Unknown
1Opinion
1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 3 4 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 5 6 JAMIE F., Case No.: 19-CV-1111-YGR 7 Plaintiff, ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR JUDGMENT 8 IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF AND DENYING v. DEFENDANT’S CROSS-MOTION 9 UNITEDHEALTHCARE INSURANCE COMPANY, Dkt. Nos. 29, 30, 34, 35 10 Defendant. 11 12 Presently before the Court is plaintiff Jamie F.’s claim under a plan covered by the 13 Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq. by defendant 14 UnitedHealthCare Insurance Company (“UHC”). Plaintiff alleges defendant improperly denied 15 coverage for inpatient…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Connecticut Department of Public Safety v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Rex T. KEARNEY, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999
- Montour v. Hartford Life & Accident InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- Salomaa v. Honda Long Term Disability PlanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.