Legal Opinion
Tancredi v. Metropolitan Life Insurance
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided April 8, 2003No. 00 Civ. 5780(LAK)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
KAPLAN, District Judge.
Plaintiffs in this case challenged the de-mutualization of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”) on constitutional grounds, suing pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This Court dismissed the complaint, holding that plaintiffs had failed to allege the requisite state action and, in any case, that their constitutional claims lacked merit. 1 The Court of Appeals affirmed on the state action ground without reaching plaintiffs’ other contentions. 2 MetLife now moves for attorneys’ fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1988 as a prevailing party. Plaintiffs…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Anderson v. CreightonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Mitchell v. ForsythSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Pioneer Investment Services Co. v. Brunswick Associates Ltd. PartnershipSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Christiansburg Garment Co. v. Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Stephen Tancredi and Ronald Speidel v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, a New York Stock Company, and Metlife, Inc., a Delaware Holding CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
- McGrath v. Toys "R" US, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2004
- McGrath v. Toys "R" US, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2004