Legal Opinion

Kracht v. Aalfs Associates H.C.P.

District Court, N.D. Iowa

Decided October 17, 1995No. C 94-4025PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

BENNETT, District Judge.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND.607

II. STANDARDS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT.608

III. FINDINGS OF FACT. Oí O

A. Undisputed Facts. O O

B. Disputed Facts. Oi H-i

IV. LEGAL ANALYSIS. vH

A. Standard Of Review. tH

B. Pre-existing Condition Analysis. CO

C. Pre-Certification For Kracht’s Surgery t~~

V.CONCLUSION.618

This litigation raises a troublesome issue in which forty-eight hours determines whether Plaintiff or his former employer’s health care plan must pay more than $50,000 in…

2Cases cited56 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  5. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989

51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bruns v. HalfordDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 1996
  2. Bonilla v. Principal Financial GroupDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2003
  3. Lawson v. Fortis InsuranceDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2001
  4. FUTAMURA ESTATE OF FUTAMURA v. Unum Life Ins. Co. of AmericaDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API