Legal Opinion
Mull v. Motion Picture Industry Health Plan
District Court, C.D. California
Decided September 30, 2014No. Case No. LA CV 12-06693-VBFPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion & Order(1) Granting the Motion for Summary Judgment of Plaintiffs Norman, Danielle, & Carson Mull on the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”);(2) Denying the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment or in the Alternative Summary Adjudication on the FAC;(3)Directing the Moving Plaintiffs to File an Amended Proposed Order No Later than Monday, October 13, 2014
VALERIE BAKER FAIRBANK, District Judge.
This is an action under the Employee Retirement Income and Security Act of *9121974, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq., as amended (“ERISA”). The defendants are the Motion Picture Industry (“MPI”) Health…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- CIGNA Corp. v. AmaraSupreme Court of the United States · 2011
- Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. SchoonejongenSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Almont Ambulatory Surgery Center, LLC v. UnitedHealth Group, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2015
- Donna Rhea v. Alan Ritchey, Inc Welfare Bnft, et aCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2017
- Noah U. v. Tribune Co. Medical PlanDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2015
- Apollo Education Group Inc. v. Henry ex rel. minor child P.H.District Court, D. Arizona · 2015