Legal Opinion
Reinert v. Giorgio Foods, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided July 10, 1998No. 2:97-cv-02379PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
VAN ANTWERPEN, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendant Giorgio Foods, Inc. (the “Defendant”) improperly denied Barbara Reinert benefits which were payable under the Giorgio Foods, Inc. Health and Welfare Plan (the “Plan”), in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. The Plaintiffs are seeking the amount of benefits allegedly owing, attorney’s fees and costs, and an order directing the Defendant to pay Ms. Reinert’s future medical expenses. Jurisdiction is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. §§…
2Cases cited20 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
- United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Varity Corp. v. HoweSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Gans, Curtis, G. v. Mundy, James F. And the Law Firm of Raynes, McCarty Binder & MundyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Shirley O. Fought v. Unum Life Insurance Company of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
- Fought v. UNUM Life Insurance Co. of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
- Doyle v. Nationwide Ins. Companies & Affiliates Employee Health Care PlanDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2003
- Harrison v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2008
- Horton v. NicholsonDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2006
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.