Legal Opinion
MacMillan v. Provident Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Phila.
District Court, W.D. New York
Decided January 5, 1999No. 6:95-cv-06387PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER
LARIMER, Chief Judge.
Plaintiff, Harold M. MacMillan, commenced this action against defendants Provident Mutual Life Insurance Company (“Provident”)" and UNUM Life Insurance Company of America (“UNUM”) under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. During his previous employment with Provident, plaintiff was covered by a long-term disability insurance policy purchased by Provident from UNUM. Plaintiff alleges that he is permanently disabled, and that defendants have violated his rights to the policy, first by miscalculating the amount of…
2Cases cited51 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
- Max W. Perry v. Simplicity Engineering, a Division of Lukens General Industries, Inc., a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- Kenneth E. Wildbur, Sr. v. Arco Chemical Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992
- Benito T. PEREZ, Jr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Berger v. Xerox Retirement Income Guaranty PlanDistrict Court, S.D. Illinois · 2002
- Fitch v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A.District Court, W.D. New York · 1999
- Haag v. MVP Health CareDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2012
- Critchlow v. First Unum Life Insurance Co. of AmericaDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2002
- Pretty v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2010
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.