Legal Opinion
Luann Gillespie v. Liberty Life Assurance Company
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Decided May 30, 2014No. 13-1052UnpublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ROGERS, Circuit Judge.
Appellant Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston (Liberty) wrongly concluded that Appellee Luann Gillespie did not meet the definition of “totally disabled” under National’s Long Term Disability Plan (Plan). The district court correctly so ruled.
Gillespie began working for National City Corporation (National) as a bank teller in 1998. She held that position until July 2007 when she underwent a lumbar laminectomy and limited fusion to correct back and leg pain. As a full-time employee at National, Gillespie was eligible for long-term disability benefits under the Plan.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Black & Decker Disability Plan v. NordSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Linda Gail Calvert v. Firstar Finance, Inc., F/k/a Star Bank Corporation, and Liberty Life Assurance Company of BostonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2005
- Becky Cooper v. Life Insurance Company of North America, Ace Ina Long Term Disability Plan, and Ace Ina Holdings, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
- Bennett v. Kemper National Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2008
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Bennetts v. AT & T Integrated Disability Service CenterDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2014
- Bustetter v. Standard Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Kentucky · 2019
- Murchison v. Reliance Standard Life Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 2020