Legal Opinion
Klund v. High Technology Solutions, Inc.
District Court, S.D. California
Decided October 17, 2005No. 05CV0565-JAH (BLM)PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER [Doc. No. 14]
MAJOR, United States Magistrate Judge.
On March 21, 2005, Plaintiff instituted this action to contest Defendants’ denial of her claim for long-term disability benefits under plans regulated by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). On August 12, 2005, Plaintiff served discovery requests on Defendants. Dorny Decl. at Exs. A and B. Defendants refused to respond to the discovery requests, insisting that such discovery is inappropriate in an ERISA case. Id. at Ex. D. In summary,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Seattle Times Co. v. RhinehartSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Black & Decker Disability Plan v. NordSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Beckman Industries, Inc. Smithkline Beckman, and Stauffer Chemical Company, Intervenors-Appellees v. International Insurance Company, Beckman Industries, Inc. Smithkline Beckman, and Monsanto Company Reichhold Limited Fmc Corporation Bridgestone/firestone, Intervenors-Appellees v. International Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1992
- Phillips v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Am. Orthopedic & Sports Med. v. Independence Blue Cross Blue ShieldCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
- Hancock v. Aetna Life Insurance Co.District Court, W.D. Washington · 2017
- Duran v. Cisco Systems, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2009
- Groom v. Standard InsuranceDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2007
- BIG LAGOON RANCHERIA v. CaliforniaDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.