Legal Opinion
Lake v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided January 19, 1996No. 94-3852PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SUHRHEINRICH, Circuit Judge.
Plaintiffs, former General Electric Company (“GE”) employees who became disabled *1374while at GE, brought suit under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 1001-1461 (West 1985 & Supp.1995), to recover insurance benefits allegedly due them. At issue is the proper interpretation of an employee welfare plan providing long-term disability insurance coverage administered by GE and underwritten by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“Met Life”). The district court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants, holding…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Connie M. Miller v. Metropolitan Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
- Hugh Edwards v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988
- Ernest E. Evans v. Safeco Life Insurance Company, Personal Security Option Program--Lockheed Special Accident Insurance Plan, Lockheed CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Russell Wulf and Ronald Rentschler v. Quantum Chemical Corporation Quantum Employee Stock Ownership Plan for Hourly Represented EmployeesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1994
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Lake v. Metropolitan Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1996
- Morrison v. Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2004