Legal Opinion
Metropolitan Life Insurance v. Price
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided September 4, 2007No. 05-2927PublishedCited by 125 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
CHAGARES, Circuit Judge.
Appellant Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife”) is the claims fiduciary of an “employee welfare benefit plan.” See Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) § 3(1), 29 U.S.C. § 1002(1). After one of the plan’s participants died, MetLife received competing claims to the decedent’s life-insurance benefits. It responded by filing this inter-pleader action against the competing claimants. The District Court raised the issue of subject matter jurisdiction sua sponte and dismissed. In our view, however, the District Court had…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better EnvironmentSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2006
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Bell v. HoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by125 opinions
- Lin v. Attorney General of the United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008
- Vaught v. Scottsdale Healthcare Corp. Health PlanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008
- John Cottillion v. United Refining CoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2015
- Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. HovisCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
- Crowell v. Shell Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2008
120 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.